From: abian@iastate.edu (Alexander Abian)
Subject: TIME HAS INERTIA   ABIAN replies to PEREGRINO
Summary: WHY (A1) and (A3) ?
Keywords: BE OPEN MINDED
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 00:20:27 GMT

Dear Mr. Peregrino,
 
 
You asked how does (A3) or (A1) explain the  non-mixing of a drop
of oil in the water.  They explain as follow:
  
First of all, I would say "apparent  non-mixing). Then


  There is a tendency on the part of both oil and water to maintain
their status quos.  Just as the  tendency on the part of both Cuba 
and the U.S.to maintain their status quos. There is a struggle for 
the maintenance of their status quos and with passage of time  there
may achieve a compromise.


  So, you cannot immediately conclude that there is no mixing.  
I am very much inclined to say that the mixing takes places in 
extremely small amounts and maybe in 10 years there will be a
sizable  amount of mixing compromise.

  Why are some scientists and some physicist afraid of  bringing
(Ai)'s into their reasoning.  Some are afraid of attributing to
matter some psychological behavior akin to the psychological
behavior of human matter !  Some are afraid as much as the  Drakula
is afraid of the sign of a cross!  WHY ?  Because, their fear is also
explained by THE TENDENCY OF MAINTAINING THE STATUS QUO OF THEIR
OUTDATED  VIEWS - and this GIVES THEM A FEELING OF SECURITY, i.e ,
validating  (A1) and (A3).


  As far your criticism that (A3) may be useless since it explains
also nothing (I do not know how did you arrive at this !), I
would say that (A3) is EXTREMELY USEFUL.  Didn't  you read the
example that I gave  of the father who spanks the child  for
crying and resisting to let the barber  cut his (the child's) hair
especially for the first time ?  Wasn't it intelligent and useful 
to point out to the father that for the formative 9  months the 
child in his mother' womb did not give up a single hair! And, that
the child feels very insecure to let his hair be cut.  And, the
resistance of the child is explained by (A3).  Isn't this enough
to convince you of usefulness of (A3).  

  AS far as my formula for the irretrievable energy being spent
by the Cosmos for moving TIME forward, I have repeatedly said, 
use the following form:

                         dE = -A E dt

which expresses the fact that  dE amount of Cosmic energy is
spent to move  TIME  to  dt amount  when the Cosmic Energymeter
reads  E.    A>0  is a constant it could be perhaps of  Mcc form. 
Is it  A  for Abian ?  If it suggests itself that way -it is O.K. 
with me - yes,  it is for Abian.

  As far as what good science is - my answer is what I say a
good science is.  Thus, I do not need or share the usal defini-
tions of a  GOOD SCIENCE , i.e., it must be this and that...it
must not be this and that...  They told van GOGH that a good 
painting of a night sky  is a sky with one MOON- and yours Mr.
van Gogh  has two moons  it is not a good painting and you should
throw it into a trash can.  Today that painting is valued 45 million
dollars. 

   THE ACCEPTANCE OF MY PRINCIPLES (A1) to (A4)  IS INEVITABLE FOR
   DEVELOPING AND EXPLAINING THE BEHAVIOR OF  MATTER FROM PARTICLE TO
   HUMAN BEINGS TO GALAXIES.  THERE IS NO WAY OUT.

 Mr. Peragrino, you seem to be genuinely interested in  

                       dE = -A E dt

and in the experimental, verification and  the magnitude of A > 0.
I suggest that you consider these very seriously.

  With best wishes for the holidays,         Alexander Abian















-- 
   The tendency of maintaining the status-quo, Reaction to provocation and
                The tendency of maintaining again a status-quo.  
    TIME HAS INERTIA  and some energy is lost to move Time forward  
  E = mcc  (Einstein)    must be replaced by    E = m(0) exp(-At) (Abian)