George Kanev

see:

[American Physical Society @APSphysics]

Julia Phillips was abruptly dismissed from the National Science Board in April, along with every other member. But she’s still fighting for science. She spoke with #APSNews about the stakes for U.S. Science and why we need to act quickly: https://t.co/pmscZAWe4W

[Bundeskanzler Friedrich Merz @bundeskanzler]

Wir machen diese Reformen vor allem für unsere Kinder.

[Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський @ZelenskyyUa]

Today, we received information from the American side about the meetings in Moscow that took place the other day. There was a series of meetings. We spoke before the meetings, and we have spoken again now with the Americans.

Thank you for the information – and for the necessary tone of the conversation with Russia. We value the alignment of steps and the fact that America is advancing a realistic vision of what needs to be done and what must be achieved. Russia must end its war, and all the necessary conditions must be created to make that happen.

[George Kanev @GeorgeKanev2]

About gamma ray: Imagine we have reached this fare a way place in the universe then this X or gamma rays will increase their length or not?
About shown object from JPL and NASA and assertion that this is two “black holes” interacting each other: The distance to this object is 3,8 billion light years or so. When the light ray start from this object towards us (Earth) the velocity of birth of the periphery matter- let accept that it is in order of 300 km/s how it is in our galaxy (average tangential velocity of revolving). Maybe this velocity is differently, but it is impossible a lot (USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu ). During light ray traveling from this object to us, the velocity of birth shrinks the perimeter of the periphery by the formula:
∆P=V_B (D(distance))/(C(velocity of light))= 300[km/s] (3,8.〖10〗^9.〖10〗^13 [km])/(3.〖10〗^5 [km/s] )=300.1,26.〖10〗^17 [s]=3,8.〖10〗^19 [km]
If the diameter of these two objects are approximately the same as it is in our galaxy around 5.〖10〗^4 light years=5.〖10〗^17 [km] , then follows that the efficiency of thickening is equal to
K=(3,8.〖10〗^19 [km])/(5.〖10〗^17 [km] )≈100[times] Therefore all distances in this object are shrinking around 100 times And if this object indeed is energy activated, then the velocity of birth can be 10 time bigger or so and hence the shrinking is 1000 times. So obviously the real spot diameter of these objects is around 1000 times bigger than what we see from Earth and the distance between these two objects it isn’t 1 light year but 1000 light years and the observed length of waves from here (Earth) must to increase 1000 times. The same it is in force about the spot energy E=h.γ→ real spot energy is 1000 times smaller than what we observing from Earth. You can see that this energy concentration which we observing from here (Earth), in fact is far more normal and therefore violence looking object called “black hole” is illusion.
Let me now calculate the same object’s parameters but without the thickening of the space, and only using the general relativity formula √(1-V^2/C^2 ) Let return to the page: 81, 82 USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu where was calculated the Sun velocity of birth. If we don’t take into account the thickening of the space but only shown relativistic member, it is seen that we must to take velocity of birth 0,9999…9.C almost equal to the velocity of light and this is only about one Sun mass…but what about millions of sun masses how it is asserted to exist in so called “super massive black holes”….then what must to be the velocity of birth…equal to velocity of light?! Obviously these “black holes” which so much like to use nowadays astronomers is absolutely foolishness!
Interesting simple and correct explanation by Brian Greene exactly as a good professor, but the well known experiment from the early 20 century has more accurately interpretation, see pages 80 to 84 USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu On the formula 79 is established that the velocity of birth of Sun is 347 km/s which exactly coincides with the observing angle of stars shifting, but has nothing to do with the tangential velocity of the Sun equatorial plane which is 2,02 km/s (see page 17 USM) and which according to GR must to take into account to calculate the bending of the space in GR manner. So obviously observed shifting of the stars in case of full sun eclipse has nothing to do with the GR bending of the space, but this is result of thickening of the space provoked by the velocity of birth of the Sun, which by the way coincides with the tangential velocity of the galaxy in Sun spot. That delusion of GR explanation again comes from the discussed already: That is great Brian! But mathematically it is right as equation, but physically it is wrong, or more exactly it is wrong as a generalization, but can use in some degree accuracy as to know ever what is the error experimentally. Where is the physically delusion here? On the shown differential equation there is equalized the second differential delivery (acceleration) with the whole energy divided by unit length (ds), which is correct as equation but wrong physically because we accept a priori that all unit energy per length is spending to bend the space and at the same time without any time belated. In other words we say: yes the space is bends (in kinematic manner) and we instantly (without any experimental proof) decided that this is all energy per unit length which made up this bending. What give us right to think so?……there it isn’t any physically basic to assert this……where is the energy of interaction with the surrounding matter, because such object cannot be alone in the universe. The same is in force about Hilbert integral (operator) where is included the time again simultaneously! So I again remind this:
Gravitational lens has nothing to do with the black hole conception, because I remind again this: What is the first: the revolving disc, which may hasn’t any mass, but which has tangential velocity and therefore bend the space around itself, or the spherical mass which has or hasn’t tangential velocity but we accuse that this mass bend the space and creates the so called space time curvilinear tensor? Gravity is dynamically characterization (centripetal acceleration) but the bending is kinematic characterization.
So the bending of the space is provoked by the velocity of birth of this object (see part I USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu), which it isn’t object of special or general relativity, such conception doesn’t exist there and we cannot connect this velocity with the gravitational acceleration, but in USM this velocity is connected with the gravitational acceleration through this dynamically (I repeat dynamically but not kinematic) equation: g=(V.C)/R ln(1+V/C), which on the other hand is connected with the mass of object through: g=G.M/r^2 . So you can see that this is linear connection between the velocity of birth and mass of the object in one dynamically equation, which is relativistic invariant according to Lorentz transformation! G.Kanev

[George Kanev @GeorgeKanev2]

About gamma ray: Imagine we have reached this fare a way place in the universe then this X or gamma rays will increase their length or not?
About shown object from JPL and NASA and assertion that this is two “black holes” interacting each other: The distance to this object is 3,8 billion light years or so. When the light ray start from this object towards us (Earth) the velocity of birth of the periphery matter- let accept that it is in order of 300 km/s how it is in our galaxy (average tangential velocity of revolving). Maybe this velocity is differently, but it is impossible a lot (USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu ). During light ray traveling from this object to us, the velocity of birth shrinks the perimeter of the periphery by the formula:
∆P=V_B (D(distance))/(C(velocity of light))= 300[km/s] (3,8.〖10〗^9.〖10〗^13 [km])/(3.〖10〗^5 [km/s] )=300.1,26.〖10〗^17 [s]=3,8.〖10〗^19 [km]
If the diameter of these two objects are approximately the same as it is in our galaxy around 5.〖10〗^4 light years=5.〖10〗^17 [km] , then follows that the efficiency of thickening is equal to
K=(3,8.〖10〗^19 [km])/(5.〖10〗^17 [km] )≈100[times] Therefore all distances in this object are shrinking around 100 times And if this object indeed is energy activated, then the velocity of birth can be 10 time bigger or so and hence the shrinking is 1000 times. So obviously the real spot diameter of these objects is around 1000 times bigger than what we see from Earth and the distance between these two objects it isn’t 1 light year but 1000 light years and the observed length of waves from here (Earth) must to increase 1000 times. The same it is in force about the spot energy E=h.γ→ real spot energy is 1000 times smaller than what we observing from Earth. You can see that this energy concentration which we observing from here (Earth), in fact is far more normal and therefore violence looking object called “black hole” is illusion.
Let me now calculate the same object’s parameters but without the thickening of the space, and only using the general relativity formula √(1-V^2/C^2 ) Let return to the page: 81, 82 USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu where was calculated the Sun velocity of birth. If we don’t take into account the thickening of the space but only shown relativistic member, it is seen that we must to take velocity of birth 0,9999…9.C almost equal to the velocity of light and this is only about one Sun mass…but what about millions of sun masses how it is asserted to exist in so called “super massive black holes”….then what must to be the velocity of birth…equal to velocity of light?! Obviously these “black holes” which so much like to use nowadays astronomers is absolutely foolishness!
Interesting simple and correct explanation by Brian Greene exactly as a good professor, but the well known experiment from the early 20 century has more accurately interpretation, see pages 80 to 84 USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu On the formula 79 is established that the velocity of birth of Sun is 347 km/s which exactly coincides with the observing angle of stars shifting, but has nothing to do with the tangential velocity of the Sun equatorial plane which is 2,02 km/s (see page 17 USM) and which according to GR must to take into account to calculate the bending of the space in GR manner. So obviously observed shifting of the stars in case of full sun eclipse has nothing to do with the GR bending of the space, but this is result of thickening of the space provoked by the velocity of birth of the Sun, which by the way coincides with the tangential velocity of the galaxy in Sun spot. That delusion of GR explanation again comes from the discussed already: That is great Brian! But mathematically it is right as equation, but physically it is wrong, or more exactly it is wrong as a generalization, but can use in some degree accuracy as to know ever what is the error experimentally. Where is the physically delusion here? On the shown differential equation there is equalized the second differential delivery (acceleration) with the whole energy divided by unit length (ds), which is correct as equation but wrong physically because we accept a priori that all unit energy per length is spending to bend the space and at the same time without any time belated. In other words we say: yes the space is bends (in kinematic manner) and we instantly (without any experimental proof) decided that this is all energy per unit length which made up this bending. What give us right to think so?……there it isn’t any physically basic to assert this……where is the energy of interaction with the surrounding matter, because such object cannot be alone in the universe. The same is in force about Hilbert integral (operator) where is included the time again simultaneously! So I again remind this:
Gravitational lens has nothing to do with the black hole conception, because I remind again this: What is the first: the revolving disc, which may hasn’t any mass, but which has tangential velocity and therefore bend the space around itself, or the spherical mass which has or hasn’t tangential velocity but we accuse that this mass bend the space and creates the so called space time curvilinear tensor? Gravity is dynamically characterization (centripetal acceleration) but the bending is kinematic characterization.
So the bending of the space is provoked by the velocity of birth of this object (see part I USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu), which it isn’t object of special or general relativity, such conception doesn’t exist there and we cannot connect this velocity with the gravitational acceleration, but in USM this velocity is connected with the gravitational acceleration through this dynamically (I repeat dynamically but not kinematic) equation: g=(V.C)/R ln(1+V/C), which on the other hand is connected with the mass of object through: g=G.M/r^2 . So you can see that this is linear connection between the velocity of birth and mass of the object in one dynamically equation, which is relativistic invariant according to Lorentz transformation! G.Kanev

[George Kanev @GeorgeKanev2]

The normalization appears like needing because in the relativistic quantum mechanics we always apply equations relativistic invariant according to Lorentz transformation only in kinematic manner without to take into account the dynamically interaction in the phenomenon and in what extent this interaction drags on approaching the velocity of light towards the velocity of light in empty or absolute space. Simplify the idea is in this: About time’s universe and how it is explained? Shown by Stephen kinematic analysis about time definition and fitness with Lorentz transformation is correct mathematically there is necessary to apply some correction regarding the nature of the light spreading and whether or not there do exist absolute or empty space? First about length does and afterwards about time does. First this:
Interesting and passionately lecture by Brian Greene and I like it, but there I see the first two weak points of special theory of relativity. Brian said that to apply the special theory of relativity between two objects movement, the velocity between them has to be constant: dV/dt=constant which means that there absent acceleration da=0 which is correct in Einstein relativity. But that is the first weak point: if the acceleration between the two objects is equal to zero, then whether these two object exist each other or don’t? And if the answer is don’t, then how we can measure this velocity between two don’t exist each other objects? Obviously this is the problem of special relativity, because to exist each other the two objects have to dynamically interact, for example if we are one of the objects, to see another the light ray has to reach this object which is field (light) interaction. More over according to USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu in the spaces there is no empty space, which means that always exist dynamically interaction between all objects to be possible to exist each other.
The second weak point is connected with the velocity equality of special relativity and how correctly pointed out Brian, when in equation: u_x=(W_x+V)/(1+(W_x V_x)/C^2 ) the two velocities of two objects are equal between and equal to the velocity of light, then we obtain that u_x is equal to the velocity of light C as well, which means that there no matter whether the coordinate is movable or not (see page 48 USM). But is it possible the two objects to possess velocity of light even they are light rays themselves and by this way to become indistinguishable each other? The answer is no, because the light velocity is different in different mediums (different object have to have different velocities) and that is why we need this:
The problem of photon comes from this: The empty or absolute space doesn’t exist according to USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu because of the essence of creating the fields (all gravitation, electrostatic-magnetic and nuclear) and their interconnection regarding their quality essence and quantity sizes. So in the general relativity any where the velocity of light in vacuum must to replace with the velocity of light in empty space and because such empty space doesn’t exist, that is the main reason that such velocity can’t be reached. So obviously the photon can has mass in repose equal to zero only in empty space, which doesn’t exist in reality, then all real photons in fact are virtual photons (relativistic photons) which in low velocities, their masses inclined to zero, but they have some masses through interaction with the surrounding matter (the surrounding matter carry partially light ray – experiment of Fizau). This interaction is realizes by the electromagnetic field in accordance with the equations of Maxwell Lorentz and in accordance with the essence of the light ray shown in USM.
Second:
Is it possible at all to exist equal several in number observers statically arranged in place (x=0)? The answer is no because to exist some two objects each other they must to have dynamically interaction, that is the measurement itself. So obviously the objects are always differentiates by some energy distances and therefore time distances. Time is definite as cycle movement of some object in its trajectory always in dynamically interaction with the surrounding objects (matter). Haw we know relativistic invariant according to Lorentz’s transformation can to be only the first differential delivering of trajectory (road) by the time. The second is already acceleration and it is not relativistic invariant. That is the idea of accepting relativistic measurement units (h=c=1) to be possible creation of Dirac equations. See relativistic quantum mechanics page 345 complement 4 USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu where it is proved by hyperbolic functions. But one acceleration definite generally field essence in Undivided Structure of the Matter (USM) https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu part I is simultaneously relativistic invariant according to Lorentz transformation and does represent second differential delivering (road/time):
g=(V.C)/R ln(1+V/C) G.Kanev

[George Kanev @GeorgeKanev2]

The normalization appears like needing because in the relativistic quantum mechanics we always apply equations relativistic invariant according to Lorentz transformation only in kinematic manner without to take into account the dynamically interaction in the phenomenon and in what extent this interaction drags on approaching the velocity of light towards the velocity of light in empty or absolute space. Simplify the idea is in this: About time’s universe and how it is explained? Shown by Stephen kinematic analysis about time definition and fitness with Lorentz transformation is correct mathematically there is necessary to apply some correction regarding the nature of the light spreading and whether or not there do exist absolute or empty space? First about length does and afterwards about time does. First this:
Interesting and passionately lecture by Brian Greene and I like it, but there I see the first two weak points of special theory of relativity. Brian said that to apply the special theory of relativity between two objects movement, the velocity between them has to be constant: dV/dt=constant which means that there absent acceleration da=0 which is correct in Einstein relativity. But that is the first weak point: if the acceleration between the two objects is equal to zero, then whether these two object exist each other or don’t? And if the answer is don’t, then how we can measure this velocity between two don’t exist each other objects? Obviously this is the problem of special relativity, because to exist each other the two objects have to dynamically interact, for example if we are one of the objects, to see another the light ray has to reach this object which is field (light) interaction. More over according to USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu in the spaces there is no empty space, which means that always exist dynamically interaction between all objects to be possible to exist each other.
The second weak point is connected with the velocity equality of special relativity and how correctly pointed out Brian, when in equation: u_x=(W_x+V)/(1+(W_x V_x)/C^2 ) the two velocities of two objects are equal between and equal to the velocity of light, then we obtain that u_x is equal to the velocity of light C as well, which means that there no matter whether the coordinate is movable or not (see page 48 USM). But is it possible the two objects to possess velocity of light even they are light rays themselves and by this way to become indistinguishable each other? The answer is no, because the light velocity is different in different mediums (different object have to have different velocities) and that is why we need this:
The problem of photon comes from this: The empty or absolute space doesn’t exist according to USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu because of the essence of creating the fields (all gravitation, electrostatic-magnetic and nuclear) and their interconnection regarding their quality essence and quantity sizes. So in the general relativity any where the velocity of light in vacuum must to replace with the velocity of light in empty space and because such empty space doesn’t exist, that is the main reason that such velocity can’t be reached. So obviously the photon can has mass in repose equal to zero only in empty space, which doesn’t exist in reality, then all real photons in fact are virtual photons (relativistic photons) which in low velocities, their masses inclined to zero, but they have some masses through interaction with the surrounding matter (the surrounding matter carry partially light ray – experiment of Fizau). This interaction is realizes by the electromagnetic field in accordance with the equations of Maxwell Lorentz and in accordance with the essence of the light ray shown in USM.
Second:
Is it possible at all to exist equal several in number observers statically arranged in place (x=0)? The answer is no because to exist some two objects each other they must to have dynamically interaction, that is the measurement itself. So obviously the objects are always differentiates by some energy distances and therefore time distances. Time is definite as cycle movement of some object in its trajectory always in dynamically interaction with the surrounding objects (matter). Haw we know relativistic invariant according to Lorentz’s transformation can to be only the first differential delivering of trajectory (road) by the time. The second is already acceleration and it is not relativistic invariant. That is the idea of accepting relativistic measurement units (h=c=1) to be possible creation of Dirac equations. See relativistic quantum mechanics page 345 complement 4 USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu where it is proved by hyperbolic functions. But one acceleration definite generally field essence in Undivided Structure of the Matter (USM) https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu part I is simultaneously relativistic invariant according to Lorentz transformation and does represent second differential delivering (road/time):
g=(V.C)/R ln(1+V/C) G.Kanev

[George Kanev @GeorgeKanev2]

About forces do surrounding us in our world. That is one very important correction. In fact these three forces electrostatic gravitational and nuclear are the same force, but only the thickening of the space around us, during the expansion of the universe (actually only our galaxy) gradually forms their quantity differences and deludes us that they are three different forces. That is explained in detail on part II USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu Quality identity and inertial character of these three forces is explained in part I on the same site. The rest namely the polarization of the space and following there essence of the weak and strong interaction is shown here: On pages 55, 56, 57 USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu is shown the essence of polarization of the space and the equation of that, which is universally about the all stable fields: gravitational, electromagnetic and nuclear and explain in very simple and convincing way behavior of strong and weak interactions. In particular it is explains the belts of Jupiter and Saturn and their approximately sizes. Most important conclusion is that these belts have relativistic velocity of birth, which leads to the conclusion that these two planets are the most dangerous place on the solar system.
What is the charge nature you can see in page 11, fig.4, fig.5 part I USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu which explains inertial character of the electrical charge.
Magnetism is mechanical inertial moment of revolving mass, here is taken in to account always the mass of proton not the electron, see the end of part III USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu The quantity difference between the gravitational end electrostatic forces appears in process of universe expansion and this difference is such as we measure it only in our position of Sun spot in the galaxy in the past it was smaller and at the future it will became stronger, see part I and II USM.
But how the centripetal acceleration remains constant in different physical conditions: temperature, pressure and so on, because we assert in USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu that through inter movement between the atoms (galaxies on the over space respectively) they create their own field (centripetal accelerations). Well first you need to read again part I and II USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu After that you need to read pages 85 to 98 (USM and the quantum mechanics) USM and especially pages 90 to 93 where is explained why the between atom’s distances (the length of Plank about atom’s quantum action) and why the between nuclear distances ( the length of Plank about nuclear quantum action pages 161 to 174 USM), why they aren’t change by the physical conditions temperature and pressure and remain constant and what happen in border case close to the absolute zero temperature, which explains the essence of the superconductivity and super liquidity, see part VI superconductivity USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu
First of all what is the essence of the field according to USM (Undivided Structure of the Matter) https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu ? On the part I is shown how the gravitational field is creates and summarizing its looks like this (see part I USM): When the new appearing object (for example the Moon around the Earth) springs up, there this object (the Moon) is births with tangential velocity of birth (V) and the body is moves tangentially and freely until the light ray has “communicated” to the attracting body (the Earth) about the has coming changing in the equilibrium between centripetal and centrifugal forces (appearance of new object). Then appears attracting reaction from the Earth and the Moon bends its trajectory until the centripetal acceleration is directed at the center of the trajectory the Earth. So in the beginning of springing up of the Moon the velocity and the centripetal acceleration are perpendicular each other, but when the centripetal acceleration begin to run (because this reaction belated) the two the velocity and acceleration are already parallel each other. So actually the equatorial plane of the Moon is revolves into 90 degree. Thus is creates circular symmetry in the plane of moon’s orbit and in the same way is creates the spherical symmetry but there is necessary to take into account the thickening and expansion of the space (see USM part I). And because of the expansion of the Universe (in fact our galaxy only) the micro cosmos is thickening and the macro cosmos is expands which increases the density of the atoms (nuclei) and decreases the density of the galaxies and between galaxy distances. So this process exactly coincides with the differences between the gravitational, electrical and nuclear forces (see part II USM), it means that there exists only one field, which appears like a gravitational field in between galaxy’s space, like a electrostatic field in between atom’s space and as a nuclear field in between nuclear space. Thus is explains the quantity difference between the three field, which shows that these three fields actually is the same only field. So the belated interaction between Earth and Moon and attraction force of Earth created the own centripetal acceleration of Moon and the belated interaction between the Sun and Earth and attraction force of the Sun creates the own centripetal acceleration of Earth and so on. But how is creates the centripetal acceleration of galaxies, see part I USM. Finally indeed the distances in the solar system gradually and very slowly about our clock ticing is increases. G.Kanev

[George Kanev @GeorgeKanev2]

What will happen if shown star nebula is in unusual condition development because of its unusually huge mass?
The topic here is: “Astronomers have found one supernova remnant in the vicinity of the superbubble and identified an approximately 5 million year difference in age between stars within and at the rim of the superbubble, indicating multiple, chain-reaction star-forming events. The deep blue area at about 5 o’clock around the superbubble is one of the hottest regions of the nebula and the area of the most intense star formation.
N44 is an emission nebula, which means its gas has been energized, or ionized, by the radiation of nearby stars. As the ionized gas begins to cool from its higher-energy state to a lower-energy state, it emits energy in the form of light, causing the nebula to glow. Located in the Large Magellanic Cloud, N44 spans about 1,000 light-years and is about 170,000 light-years away from Earth.”
But before that let see again previously discussion:
…..”And if the star nebula looks like duo formation and if its layers “pulsing” in long time observation then this is fluctuation between the parameter temperature and pressure of the plasma in accordance with the following and become possible because of closely radius of birth and velocity of birth in the beginning of formation of the star, therefore that can be only very massive star”….
About the density and mass of the Sun in the past and at the future:
Let begin with part II USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu pages 32, 33, 34 and the conclusion: “We can see that the obtained result is coincides good with the experimental value – 35 times. It means that electrostatic force is the same that is the nuclear one, and by this it is the same as gravitational force, as well”.
This conclusion shows that in the beginning of formation of Sun on the center of our galaxy its density is the same as it is now in our living point - spot in the galaxy and only the size and mass is increases but not the density of the Sun. According to above the same is in force about any stable particle proton (neutron) electron and neutrino! So any particle possesses volume; point-particles are mathematical category which hasn’t physical means!
Now why the Sun was born on the center of our galaxy (almost on the center)? Pages 81, 82 USM where the final radius of Sun’s birth is (formula 83): 4,27.〖10〗^10 [cm] to be possible the Sun to has respectively density corresponding to its centripetal acceleration on its surface. The same density on this galaxy radius possess all stable particles and the same density characterization they have now in our point of observation but the size and mass of proton and electron are increase and the mass and size of neutrino is decreases.
What will happen with our Sun when the end begins? Let first remind again the supernova event evolution:
And if the star nebula looks like duo formation and if its layers “pulsing” in long time observation then this is fluctuation between the parameter temperature and pressure of the plasma in accordance with the following and become possible because of closely radius of birth and velocity of birth in the beginning of formation of the star, therefore that can be only very massive star:
Conclusion about: “Astronomers have found one supernova remnant in the vicinity of the superbubble and identified an approximately 5 million year difference in age between stars within and at the rim of the superbubble…… Obviously that long time the nebula pulsing in accordance with above explanation but the second section: …….indicating multiple, chain-reaction star-forming events. The deep blue area at about 5 o’clock around the superbubble is one of the hottest regions of the nebula and the area of the most intense star formation., Is not possible because we cannot find out multitude number of star’s explosion remainders where these remainders can attract near hydrogen and reignite again fusion reaction – only possibility for shining again like newly looking stars which was discussed in another post! Therefore blue shinning area is not star formation but masses with higher velocity of birth motion following by the explosion of this hypothetical heavier star!
The heavier elements which aren’t form solid stuff of the star will come to disintegration when the pressure and temperature within its volume reach the following values: 2.〖10〗^(27 ) atm.[kg/〖cm〗^2 ];3.〖10〗^11°K, see USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu When the fuel of the some star comes to its end, which means that not only the thermonuclear synthesis of hydrogen atoms already is spend, but the thermo nuclear synthesis of more heavier atoms also is on its end, then the star begins to collapse (to shrinking) and when the above values of the pressure and temperature are reached, then these atoms come to disintegration finally again into hydrogen atoms, but old ones see USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu After that again according to part I of the theory the pressure and temperature begin to decreases and again is ignites the thermonuclear synthesis, the star begin to expand reaching the pressure and temperature above which this reaction is possible: 2.〖10〗^9 atm.;〖10〗^7°K Below these parameters the thermonuclear reaction stops and the star disperse itself. Why the gravitation field cannot stop this process? Because the star is already on the periphery of its galaxy where it hasn’t necessary resonance radius to spring up again, see page 80, 81, 82, 83 USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu So there is one exception if the observed star is very massive one, then if the resonance radius where the star is situated during its collapsing is enough short then there can be born some little star which its own centripetal acceleration correspond to their current parameters: velocity of birth and radius of birth.
Conclusion: When the star is with huge mass as it is examined case then obviously the star is close to the birth’s velocity and radius in the galaxy and fluctuation of shown above parameters: pressure and temperature continues pulsing its matter until the star reach bigger radius in the galaxy where the gravity cannot longer withstand its material and the star will explode – and eventually will appear of little one – most probably!
Now conclusion about this section: N44 is an emission nebula, which means its gas has been energized, or ionized, by the radiation of nearby stars. As the ionized gas begins to cool from its higher-energy state to a lower-energy state, it emits energy in the form of light, causing the nebula to glow. Located in the Large Magellanic Cloud, N44 spans about 1,000 light-years and is about 170,000 light-years away from Earth.”
Here we must to remind again this: Now about the pulsars, this explanation is correct with one exception, namely remainder after the star explosion in fact is nuclear chain material with common magnetic moment (see joromachine https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu ) which can’t radiate anything because such material has full (not approximately) but full reflection….. that is why such material shine so brightly but not because it is in high energy state eventually!
So we can make up this conclusion: The ejected material by supernova explosion it isn’t so powerful because the core of the star in fact is passive (don’t give kinetic energy to ejected material). So the ejected out material actually carry the light energy within itself. Then how much this material can penetrate in space-radial direction and what will drag this motion? There will act two forces: one is gravity of neighboring objects (Masses) if such exist close enough and “dark matter drag”!? G.Kanev

[George Kanev @GeorgeKanev2]

This is communication not teleportation!

OK! I understand You want to discuss the one of the contradiction between the quantum mechanics and the theory of relativity, i.e. between Einstein and wave equation of Schrodinger and the determination of this equality and its interpretation by Max Born as a probability of some quantum process to happen, which is supported by Nils Bohr and other. I gave the answer of this physical problem in my theory USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu , but here I try to make summary of this answer. So let begin with the equality of uncertainty which follows by the experiments of diffraction of any particles. At the time was reject the possibility that this diffraction wave of some particle can be wave pilot, because of the instability of some wave package represented by this particle. So according to my theory, it is the mistake, which made up then the physicist. Because according to USM, that wave is exactly the wave pilot. That is so because through the wave movement of particle it creates its own field (see USM). That gives right to existence of the quantum mechanics and its correctness, according to USM, but with one stipulation, namely: All delivering of the quantum mechanics are correctly, but we cannot expect these quantum equations to give us a decision about of the essence of the field, because all equalizes are set up upon the rule of energy preservation only. So according to USM any particle can represent by wave function plus potential function of the field of this particle, because the particles create they own field through inter movement between them (see USM). Or we can represent any particle with so called belated function, which is harmonic function plus potential function (see USM). So the problem of quantum mechanics, that any particle can be simultaneously on several places decline, it’s impossible! Each particle has exact coordinate in each moment movingly upon one harmonic function trajectory!

Obviously I have to continue from the so called entangled particles or objects. So let ask ourselves the following: If the diffraction wave is the wave pilot of represented particle, then how we can distinguish the different particles because the wave is the same and it is endless (we can expect it all over our space)? Well the answer is phases – each particle has different phase. But what is the phase of particle? This is the distance between the particles (centers of own potential function of the particles), which are moving over the trajectory of the own wave belonging to all these equal particles (for example: protons, electrons and soon). So if we have one proton on some place in America for example and another proton in Europe, they have the same endless wave, but they distinguish themselves only by the difference of the own phases (something like phase modulation, similar to the principle of the internet communication). So if one of them – for example the American’s proton has phase zero, then another’ in Europe has phase  t=S/C, where t – is time (phase), S – is distance between the places of the two protons and C – is velocity of light. Because the two protons are connected by their fields, then if for one of the two happened some changing, then communicating field ray (light ray) will pass road (S) to communicate this changing to the Europe’s proton. But the velocity of this communication is equal to the velocity of light, so according to the transformation of Lorenz shortening of the distances: l=l(0).[1-(V/C) to the power 2] to the power ½, follows that the distance between the two protons become equal to zero. So the phases become equal, which means that the particles are identical, or they are the same particle. So we obviously can say that one of the protons American’s teleported itself into Europe’s one with the speed of lightning and the two protons are the same, which contradict to the already made up conclusion that one particle can be only on one place simultaneously. Moreover we never observe in reality such event like teleportation. So where is the delusion? Well, we accepted that communicating ray can move with the velocity of light, which is equal to (C) only in vacuum! But if we have some matter in between then the velocity will be a little smaller then (C), the phases will be different and the particles even almost undistinguishable they still are two different particles. That is the essence of the so called entangled particles. And that is the proving ground about the assertion that in the Universe there doesn’t exist the empty or absolute space! Let’s see now what is the influence of the position of observation of these entangled particles? Let’s suppose that the point of observation lie somewhere on the line connected the two particles, less meaning how close it is at the one particle or another. Then observing the two particles simultaneously they own waves will be with contrary vectors of movement, i.e. the two waves are always mirror looking. Still to be precise the examined experimental table have to play again with the nowadays measurement instruments!  G. Kanev

[Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський @ZelenskyyUa]

We need missiles for Patriots, and only our partners can provide them. We ain’t talking about gifts. Ukraine is ready to buy the weapons we need. What matters is that decisions be made, first and foremost in the U.S. I am grateful to everyone who is helping Ukraine save lives.

[George Kanev @GeorgeKanev2]

@ZelenskyyUa Украйна Винаги е имала много добър научен потенциал: време е той да се използва за създаване на нов високоскоростен дрон с честотна модулация на управляващия сигнал за който е необходима огромна разсейваща мощност за да бъден заглушен!

[George Kanev @GeorgeKanev2]

Very interesting experiment! The answer will be negative because the problem of time dilation in special relativity is impossibility to synchronize the clocks because the time interval is impossible to become zero because the energy for that will be infinity: E=h.γ=h.1/t→∆E=h/∆t→
→if(∆t=0)then(∆E=∞)
But what about quantum uncertainty equation for time energy?
Interesting theme! I put it in this way: Whether the uncertainty is real or illusory? The answer lies again in absolute apace (or empty space) conception upon which based all mathematical analysis and that is Cartesian coordinate which is accepted as a real existing without proof. So let begin with the time uncertainty: The time difference cannot be equal to zero, as it is shown below, which means that in the universe is impossible to synchronize the clocks. Objects (satellites) around Earth’s orbit shows difference in time “flows” compare to the similar object on the Earth surface (and with low tangential velocity) suggesting difference exactly equal to the time difference in synchronize experiment trying.
What is the time nature on the universe? We physically define the time as a quantity of movement, for example one year is the movement of Earth around the Sun in full orbital cycle. But what exactly is this movement? To clarify this let return to the relativistic quantum mechanics where we choose such measurement units that the constants of Plank, divided by 2π and velocity of light to be equal to 1, i.e. h/2π=c=1 (see page 345 USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu ). So according to the known equation: E=h.γ where γ is the frequency of the wave and E is the energy, we can write that the relativistic “cycle” energy: E=ω, where ω=2π.γ is the angular velocity (frequency). But ω has dimension: [s^(-1) ], which means that the time is converse proportionally to the cycle energy. But what about the next equation: E=N.t where N is the power of some process, it seems like the energy is proportionally to the time, but it isn’t so because if we replace the power: dE/dt=N, we see that the time is again converse proportionally to the “cycle” energy, but the “linear” energy is equal to the work made up in some process: E=A=F.s where (s) is the road which passes the force (F) and in this case it is the length of wave equal to: s=c/ω where c=1, so we can see that actually the time is proportionally to the distances (inside the cycle) as well and that is only about relativistic presentation of the examined functions. That is exactly how it is written here: What is the essence of the energy in the universe itself and from where it comes from and what is its value? From page 96, 97, 98 USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu follows that in the beginning of springing up of Our space the full energy is equal to zero for us. Then with thickening of the micro cosmos and expanding of macro cosmos due to the asymmetry of these coefficients, which depends by our position of observation in this case our living position, we have the illusion that the energy for us is increases, because we are close to the nuclei of the atoms rather than the stars and galaxy. But the macro cosmos expands more rapidly by the same reason, so full energy in our space is again equal to zero. So it is seen that the energy is “one reality in the illusion”, as well as the world itself! See USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu So by this very elegant way (haw has liking to said Einstein himself) is determinate one of the most mysterious physical phenomenon in the universe!
So let return to the equation of time connection in the special relativity, (see page 47 USM): t^'=t/β;
t=t^'/β As we can see the two times in movable and in immovable coordinates is fully replicable, then the time interval is equal to: ∆t=(t^'-t)=(t-t^' ) And the relativistic energy is equal to: E=1/∆t So what will happen if the time interval is equal to zero? The energy will be infinity! But such event is impossible to exist physically, so obviously the time interval cannot be equal to zero!? It means that the velocities of the two coordinates cannot be equal between and equal to the velocity of light, i.e. if that are two light rays. So to avoid this contradiction in the special relativity we need this:
The problem of photon comes from this: The empty or absolute space doesn’t exist according to USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu because of the essence of creating the fields (all gravitation, electrostatic-magnetic and nuclear) and their interconnection regarding their quality essence and quantity sizes. So in the general relativity any where the velocity of light in vacuum must to replace with the velocity of light in empty space and because such empty space doesn’t exist, that is the main reason that such velocity can’t be reached. So obviously the photon can has mass in repose equal to zero only in empty space, which doesn’t exist in reality, then all real photons in fact are virtual photons (relativistic photons) which in low velocities, their masses inclined to zero, but they have some masses through interaction with the surrounding matter (the surrounding matter carry partially light ray – experiment of Fizau). This interaction is realizes by the electromagnetic field in accordance with the equations of Maxwell Lorentz and in accordance with the essence of the light ray shown in USM.
Of course again follows that the so called “big bang” conception is impossible to occur, because the time cannot be equal to zero in real space (not absolute space…such doesn’t exist) and therefore the time cannot begin in this fantastic “big bang” point!
So whether the time uncertainty is real or illusory? The correct answer is illusory, because on another object the time flows independently by the observation point object, there is own time.
Now about coordinate velocity uncertainty: Here we have two unreal categories: coordinate which doesn’t exist in reality and coordinate divided by the time (another illusory parameter) which is the velocity. So obviously the coordinate velocity uncertainty again is illusory one.
But what about time energy uncertainty? It is real, but not illusory! Why? G.Kanev

[George Kanev @GeorgeKanev2]

Infinity is limited when the absolute space (or empty) space absent! Where is the concept of infinity in the USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu ? Let remind again this:
One of the mysteriously questions is asking about the “shape of the universe”.  Of course the answer is following the full understanding of universe and how it is working? The last is already pretty clear as to take into account the last and very powerful theory and it is USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu  Let begin with this: Brian Greene interesting question: “can the universe expand faster than speed of light” and you answer “yes because the space itself can expand as well”. Well, I’m not convinced that this is the right answer…why? Let me explain: According to USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu the expansion of the universe looks like this only from our point of observation – radius position of our Sun in our galaxy, which means that because our Sun was born on the center of our galaxy (almost on the center), during its movement towards the periphery and aging, more and more new masses (from our galaxy and then beyond) comes to existence (only for us) and more and more masses add towards the inertia of beginning ones, which disturbs the equilibrium between the centripetal and centrifugal forces in any existing so far orbital systems and to restore the equilibrium the space begin to expand (see USM). That is possible because in the universe doesn’t exist absolutely independently space, but only as a distances between the masses, which always are formed through orbital systems. Whether this expansion is actually real or not? For us it is real, but if we lift in the over space where our galaxies are atoms (nuclei) there and take a look down towards our galaxy we can’t see any expansion, but only (if we can see so much accurately) that our sun together with other neighboring stars simply shifting towards the periphery of the galaxy and they places are taking by another coming from the center stars. So the expansion of the universe from our position of observation (the Sun) actually is the moving of the Sun towards the periphery, looking from “above” , which means that the expansion of the space (or the same the universe) can’t reach the speed of light! Let see also these two articles and then we should make some conclusions:
What is the essence of the energy in the universe itself and from where it comes from and what is its value? From page 96, 97, 98 USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu follows that in the beginning of springing up of Our space the full energy is equal to zero for us. Then with thickening of the micro cosmos and expanding of macro cosmos due to the asymmetry of these coefficients, which depends by our position of observation in this case our living position, we have the illusion that the energy for us is increases, because we are close to the nuclei of the atoms rather than the stars and galaxy. But the macro cosmos expands more rapidly by the same reason, so full energy in our space is again equal to zero. So it is seen that the energy is “one reality in the illusion”, as well as the world itself! See USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu  So by this very elegant way (haw has liking to said Einstein himself) is determinates one of the most mysterious physical phenomenon in the universe!
If You see part I USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu You can see that the essence of the field (any field, see part II) actually explain how the orbiting object upon which is applies centripetal force creates its own field (centripetal acceleration directed at the center of this object). In fact belated contra action of the centripetal force of the main attracting body creates this field of the attracted object and there is no matter what kind of orbiting curved line this object describes, because in the universe there it isn’t absolutely space, but the space is only distance between the bodies. That is so called by me, belated functions and it is obviously that if the field (light) moves supposedly with endless velocity, on the universe shouldn’t be any fields and hence messes and the universe will be empty - absolute nothing. So the limited velocity of field (light) movement actually create all fields and therefore all objects in the universe and makes it full of life!
Now from the first article follows that if we are part from the space which we observe it looks like endlessly, because together with our aging (moving of the Sun from the center of our galaxy towards the periphery) the visible for us space continuously is expands and this runs in accelerating mode. When we begin in the center of our galaxy, our “universe” was this very first proto particle which looks like that the universe is limited and its size and energy inclines to zero in this very first moment of very first formation of “mass” – our mass! So looks like we have in the theory USM infinity conception as well which is of course some kind of uncertainty! So where is the delusion?  And obviously our universe is one reality in the illusion. But it isn’t the truly “absolutely universe”, because according to the first article: “looking from above there it isn’t any expansion, our galaxy is the atom (nucleus) on sodium in the over space and if we can see our Sun…it simply is shifting towards the periphery of our galaxy – atom of sodium in the over space”. So what is actually the absolutely (mathematically) universe? That is endlessly sequence of sub spaces and over spaces where the atoms (nuclei) in our space are galaxies from the sub space and galaxies in our space are atoms (nuclei) of the over space (and so on) and all these is connected and it is consequence by the way of field (masses) creation, see part I, part II USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu That is the truly absolutely universe, but what is the real truly universe? The things are already clarified, simply we have to take into account that the connection between the spaces is a constant defined in part II (USM) and it is time constant which is 10(power31)  folds and linearly is the same about distances connection. So when in our space passes 1 second in the sub space passes 10(power31)  seconds and when in the over space passes 1 second in our space passes 10(power31) seconds! The same are the proportions about the distances as well! So becomes clear that even the closest spaces to ours almost don’t exist such as radiation and distances! Then what about more distantly spaces? Their existence practically absent not for us, but for the absolutely universe! But what about looking at “above” this is endlessly number of over spaces! Let imagine only our expanding position in our galaxy. The expansion looks like endlessly, but this is in force only about our connection between us our position (the Sun) in the galaxy, our “living” time and the infinity of our universe expansion. Because the absolute space absent the infinity of our galaxy expansion in fact is limited and this limitation follows by the end of our living time on the periphery of our galaxy. So the infinity in the universe it isn’t chaotic as it is in case of absolute or empty space existence, but always connected with the object position and its living time, according to which this infinity appears and obviously it is limited in real universe where absolute space doesn’t exist. That is real truly universe! G.Kanev

[George Kanev @GeorgeKanev2]

Infinity is limited when the absolute space (or empty) space absent! Where is the concept of infinity in the USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu ? Let remind again this:
One of the mysteriously questions is asking about the “shape of the universe”.  Of course the answer is following the full understanding of universe and how it is working? The last is already pretty clear as to take into account the last and very powerful theory and it is USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu  Let begin with this: Brian Greene interesting question: “can the universe expand faster than speed of light” and you answer “yes because the space itself can expand as well”. Well, I’m not convinced that this is the right answer…why? Let me explain: According to USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu the expansion of the universe looks like this only from our point of observation – radius position of our Sun in our galaxy, which means that because our Sun was born on the center of our galaxy (almost on the center), during its movement towards the periphery and aging, more and more new masses (from our galaxy and then beyond) comes to existence (only for us) and more and more masses add towards the inertia of beginning ones, which disturbs the equilibrium between the centripetal and centrifugal forces in any existing so far orbital systems and to restore the equilibrium the space begin to expand (see USM). That is possible because in the universe doesn’t exist absolutely independently space, but only as a distances between the masses, which always are formed through orbital systems. Whether this expansion is actually real or not? For us it is real, but if we lift in the over space where our galaxies are atoms (nuclei) there and take a look down towards our galaxy we can’t see any expansion, but only (if we can see so much accurately) that our sun together with other neighboring stars simply shifting towards the periphery of the galaxy and they places are taking by another coming from the center stars. So the expansion of the universe from our position of observation (the Sun) actually is the moving of the Sun towards the periphery, looking from “above” , which means that the expansion of the space (or the same the universe) can’t reach the speed of light! Let see also these two articles and then we should make some conclusions:
What is the essence of the energy in the universe itself and from where it comes from and what is its value? From page 96, 97, 98 USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu follows that in the beginning of springing up of Our space the full energy is equal to zero for us. Then with thickening of the micro cosmos and expanding of macro cosmos due to the asymmetry of these coefficients, which depends by our position of observation in this case our living position, we have the illusion that the energy for us is increases, because we are close to the nuclei of the atoms rather than the stars and galaxy. But the macro cosmos expands more rapidly by the same reason, so full energy in our space is again equal to zero. So it is seen that the energy is “one reality in the illusion”, as well as the world itself! See USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu  So by this very elegant way (haw has liking to said Einstein himself) is determinates one of the most mysterious physical phenomenon in the universe!
If You see part I USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu You can see that the essence of the field (any field, see part II) actually explain how the orbiting object upon which is applies centripetal force creates its own field (centripetal acceleration directed at the center of this object). In fact belated contra action of the centripetal force of the main attracting body creates this field of the attracted object and there is no matter what kind of orbiting curved line this object describes, because in the universe there it isn’t absolutely space, but the space is only distance between the bodies. That is so called by me, belated functions and it is obviously that if the field (light) moves supposedly with endless velocity, on the universe shouldn’t be any fields and hence messes and the universe will be empty - absolute nothing. So the limited velocity of field (light) movement actually create all fields and therefore all objects in the universe and makes it full of life!
Now from the first article follows that if we are part from the space which we observe it looks like endlessly, because together with our aging (moving of the Sun from the center of our galaxy towards the periphery) the visible for us space continuously is expands and this runs in accelerating mode. When we begin in the center of our galaxy, our “universe” was this very first proto particle which looks like that the universe is limited and its size and energy inclines to zero in this very first moment of very first formation of “mass” – our mass! So looks like we have in the theory USM infinity conception as well which is of course some kind of uncertainty! So where is the delusion?  And obviously our universe is one reality in the illusion. But it isn’t the truly “absolutely universe”, because according to the first article: “looking from above there it isn’t any expansion, our galaxy is the atom (nucleus) on sodium in the over space and if we can see our Sun…it simply is shifting towards the periphery of our galaxy – atom of sodium in the over space”. So what is actually the absolutely (mathematically) universe? That is endlessly sequence of sub spaces and over spaces where the atoms (nuclei) in our space are galaxies from the sub space and galaxies in our space are atoms (nuclei) of the over space (and so on) and all these is connected and it is consequence by the way of field (masses) creation, see part I, part II USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu That is the truly absolutely universe, but what is the real truly universe? The things are already clarified, simply we have to take into account that the connection between the spaces is a constant defined in part II (USM) and it is time constant which is 10(power31)  folds and linearly is the same about distances connection. So when in our space passes 1 second in the sub space passes 10(power31)  seconds and when in the over space passes 1 second in our space passes 10(power31) seconds! The same are the proportions about the distances as well! So becomes clear that even the closest spaces to ours almost don’t exist such as radiation and distances! Then what about more distantly spaces? Their existence practically absent not for us, but for the absolutely universe! But what about looking at “above” this is endlessly number of over spaces! Let imagine only our expanding position in our galaxy. The expansion looks like endlessly, but this is in force only about our connection between us our position (the Sun) in the galaxy, our “living” time and the infinity of our universe expansion. Because the absolute space absent the infinity of our galaxy expansion in fact is limited and this limitation follows by the end of our living time on the periphery of our galaxy. So the infinity in the universe it isn’t chaotic as it is in case of absolute or empty space existence, but always connected with the object position and its living time, according to which this infinity appears and obviously it is limited in real universe where absolute space doesn’t exist. That is real truly universe! G.Kanev

[George Kanev @GeorgeKanev2]

What will happen with our Sun when the end begins?
The topic here is: “NGC 248 is about 60 light-years long and 20 light-years wide. It is among a number of glowing hydrogen nebulas in the dwarf satellite galaxy, which is located approximately 200,000 light-years away in the southern constellation Tucana.
The image is part of a study called Small Magellanic Cloud Investigation of Dust and Gas Evolution (SMIDGE). Astronomers are using Hubble to probe the Milky Way satellite to understand how dust is different in galaxies that have a far lower supply of heavy elements needed to create dust. The Small Magellanic Cloud has between a fifth and a tenth of the amount of heavy elements that the Milky Way does.
Most of the star formation happened earlier in the universe, at a time where there was a much lower percentage of heavy elements than there is now.”
Let first remind again the supernova event evolution:
……“Why the gravitation field cannot stop this process? Because the star is already on the periphery of its galaxy where it hasn’t necessary resonance radius to spring up again, see page 80, 81, 82, 83 USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu where is calculated the radius of birth of the Sun and why the stars are birth on the center of their own galaxies. So there is one exception if the observed star is very massive one, then if the resonance radius where the star is situated during its collapsing is enough short then there can be born some little star which its own centripetal acceleration correspond to their current parameters: velocity of birth and radius of birth. However, most probably the star springs up like supernova and after that die”…...
And if the star nebula looks like duo formation and if its layers “pulsing” in long time observation then this is fluctuation between the parameter temperature and pressure of the plasma in accordance with the following and become possible because of closely radius of birth and velocity of birth in the beginning of formation of the star, therefore that can be only very massive star:
The heavier elements which aren’t form solid stuff of the star will come to disintegration when the pressure and temperature within its volume reach the following values: 2.〖10〗^(27 ) atm.[kg/〖cm〗^2 ];3.〖10〗^11°K, see USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu The same is corresponds to the evolution of the neutron’s stars. When the fuel of the some star comes to its end, which means that not only the thermonuclear synthesis of hydrogen atoms already is spend, but the thermo nuclear synthesis of more heavier atoms also is on its end, then the star begins to collapse (to shrinking) and when the above values of the pressure and temperature are reached, then these atoms come to disintegration finally again into hydrogen atoms, but old ones see USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu After that again according to part I of the theory the pressure and temperature begin to decreases and again is ignites the thermonuclear synthesis, the star begin to expand reaching the pressure and temperature above which this reaction is possible: 2.〖10〗^9 atm.;〖10〗^7°K Below these parameters the thermonuclear reaction stops and the star disperse itself. Why the gravitation field cannot stop this process? Because the star is already on the periphery of its galaxy where it hasn’t necessary resonance radius to spring up again, see page 80, 81, 82, 83 USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu where is calculated the radius of birth of the Sun and why the stars are birth on the center of their own galaxies. So there is one exception if the observed star is very massive one, then if the resonance radius where the star is situated during its collapsing is enough short then there can be born some little star which its own centripetal acceleration correspond to their current parameters: velocity of birth and radius of birth. However, most probably the star springs up like supernova and after that die.
Now imagine that the Sun’s nucleus firstly has magnetic axis parallel with the rotation axis of the star (polarization). Then the plasma surrounding nucleus, we can divide into two layers until to the periphery of the sphere: one of them is with supposing positive charges and another – negative charges (this is some kind of motor where the nucleus is the rotor and the plasma is the coils). Because the magnetic induction always creates contra reactions by the coils, the rotor begins to revolve (there is appears revolving moment), which is attendant with huge eruptions (Sun activity). When the magnetic poles axis change they positions, the process is repeats, every 11 years!
Now imagine that the revolving axis of the magnetar is perpendicular at our point of observation – then this is magnetar possesses only huge magnetic moment; now if this axis is revolving on the same plane of our vector of observation – then this is pulsar; About pulsars, namely remainder after the star explosion in fact is nuclear chain material with common magnetic moment (see joromachine https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu ) which can’t radiate anything because such material has full (not approximately) but full reflection….. that is why such material shine so brightly but not because it is in high energy state eventually!
First conclusion about the assertion on shown star exploding: “Luminous Blue Variable stars continuously lose mass in the final stages of life. The star is waging a tug-of-war between gravity and radiation pressure to avoid self-destruction. As the star begins to run out of fuel, its radiation pressure decreases, and gravity begins to take hold. Stellar material succumbs to gravity and falls inward. It heats up and is explosively ejected into the surrounding interstellar space. This process continues until enough mass is lost and the star reaches a stable state.”
Obviously according to above explanation this star is in condition when the velocity of birth and radius of birth in not in resonance position in its host galaxy and the gravitation force cannot withstand the mass of the star and the process will continue until the star appears with its own nucleus which cannot disperse itself because it is nuclear chain material with far different than infra red or ultraviolet wave’s resonance of swallowing frequencies! But this remainder will possess at least huge attraction force towards itself which obviously will drag the pulling out material in the surrounding space!
Now the topic conclusion:” Most of the star formation happened earlier in the universe, at a time where there was a much lower percentage of heavy elements than there is now.”
Obviously according to above the “earlier in the universe” has nothing to do with the essence of star evolving and less with the fantasy theory about “big bang”! G.Kanev

[George Kanev @GeorgeKanev2]

When we observe the centre of our galaxy, we make this from the radius-position of our Sun. According to USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu we must to take into account the thickening of the space in this area, which is simply: ∆s=t.V where V is the velocity of birth of the object which we observe (see USM), t=D/C where D is the distance to the observed object and C is the velocity of light. So we can see that how much we are distantly from the observed object that much greater is the thickening of the space on this object. But what will happen if the thickening is so great that the length of periphery of this object becomes equal to zero or negative like a measurement from this distant point of observation? The answer is given in USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu namely the periphery length comes into quantum length changing, similar to the swallowing of quantum energy portion. It means that the radius of this object is changing by known quantum mechanical rules, i.e. 2 times smaller, 3 times smaller and soon.
So here is the conclusion: Because the thickening of the space is truth only in our point of observation follows that the same velocity on the phenomenon district will pass the same space there but in our position of observation (far away) that will like as far fast passing and hence for smaller time flowing. So the length of any wave will decreases in our point of observation and obviously with bigger frequency as well! That is the delusion which looks like huge energy radiation observed here on Earth, but in fact if we are there on the phenomenon spot, then the process will appears as “peaceful” interaction with actually non extreme and usual energy!
Whether the constant of Planck is universal all over the universe? Of course not, no constant is absolutely in the universe, all is changes depending by the time, but some processes is changes so slowly that practically it is impossible to detect not only experimentally but mathematically as well because represented it by some mathematical sequence it inclines to zero. So in concrete case this theory it isn’t correct simply because there it isn’t fulfills energy preservation, the equation of Planck is about some concrete frequency E=h.γ no matter whether this frequency radiation is illuminated particularly, or fully as it is in case of absolute black body. So about our position of observation, the radius position of our Sun in the Galaxy, this constant as well other known constant (for example the constant of velocity of light) are “absolutely”. But what about the time dependence?.... Well because we know from USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu that the Sun was born on the center of our galaxy and shifting towards the periphery the protons and electrons there become heavier and the neutrino become lighter, follows that the conditions about radiation process is changes as well. What kind of changes?....let see firstly this: Very interesting question: “whether the speed of light is absolutely…” Of course not, but this is related only to the constant of light spread like a real number, not as a limited which we can’t reach! What I mean? Firstly see pages: 94 to 98 and pages: 198 to 202 USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu here was delivered these formulae: r=h/(C.m) where: r – is the resonance radius of the particle; h – is the constant of Planck; C – is the velocity of light; m – is the mass of particle; and this formula: C_i=m_p/m_i .C where: C_i - is the constant of velocity of light (like a real number) about the different possible worlds (see shown pages); m_p - is the mass of proton; m_i - is the mass of current stable particle about current possible world; C – is velocity of light in our world where the velocity of light has this value (C). As it is seen on the shown above pages the resonance radius is connected with the mass of the particle which is stable particle in examined world and the real number of the velocity of spread of the field in this possible world. The important conclusion is not only possibility to be created “Oracul” (see the pages), but more importantly is the consequence that on the center of our galaxy (in fact any galaxy) where are situated and was born the proto particles the limited constant of spread of field (“light”) is different like a real number compare to this value in our space which is (C). That is one of the reasons that we can’t see the central zone of any galaxy! And this: So what is the Planck length in the center of any (including our) galaxy? It is inclines to zero and it is so close to zero as the energy of this spot is close to zero. Because there the thickening of the space is also inclines to zero and of course the velocity of light spreading inclines to infinity. There springs up the following question “if the light spreading inclines to infinity whether this spot contains infinity energy because of the equation:E=m.c^2 “. Because we are asserting that there the energy inclines to zero. Let return towards page 49 formula 14 and page 50 formulae 15, 16, 17 and explanation to page 51 USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu and as to take into account that these equations are actually belated ones (see part I USM) we can write: E=0,98024.〖lim〗_(m→0) (m).〖lim〗_(V→C) (V).〖lim〗_(C→∞) (C) If we replace the limits there we can obtain that the energy inclines to infinity, because there the light velocity appears risen in second power. But that is wrong, because we have to imagine that this mass (m) in fact is part of orbital system (see part I USM) to be possible to exist and when mass (m) disappear (inclines to zero), passes time t=R/C which is needed the light ray to communicates to the center of orbit about has coming changes. So the mass (m) inclines to zero before the velocity (v) to inclining to (C) and obviously the energy in this spot inclines to zero. So you can see that if we follow mathematics strictly the energy in the center of any galaxy (“big bang” or “black hole”) has to be infinity, which hasn’t physical meant, but if we observe that in the universe there absent purely interaction (without accelerations – special theory of relativity and that we cannot synchronize the clocks, because to exist some object we must to have dynamically interaction with it and there is needed time to reach the field, the light there), follows that the shown above limit of energy must to judge contra mathematically.
So whether in the center of our galaxy the constant of Planck is the same as it is in our present position - the Sun? The correct answer is no, because in the center of our galaxy and in fact about any galaxy we have the very first orbital system contained from two almost equal masses (protoparticles) orbiting each other, so the condition of quantum action is far more different in such orbital system than the hydrogen atom in our position of observation and as it is now. That is why we cannot see the center of our galaxy, because the constant of Planck there is different and it is inclines to zero there as well the length of Planck also inclines to zero.
Now the simple answer to the shown picture: combine image of galaxy in visual and X ray combining; inside galaxy rotated faster bigger angular velocity and the thickening of the space there is bigger and hence high frequency and periphery respectively low frequency and the central area is invisible at all, but only about our point of observation, if we reach this spot the situation will be different! G.Kanev

[Volodymyr Zelenskyy / Володимир Зеленський @ZelenskyyUa]

Since last night, our emergency services have been working at the sites of Russian attacks. In Kramatorsk, Donetsk region, a Russian guided aerial bomb strike caused one section of a ten-story apartment building to collapse from the first through the sixth floor. One person was killed and 16 others were injured. In the settlement of Stepanivka, Sumy region, two people, including a child, were killed when a “shahed” struck a private home. My condolences to their families and loved ones. In Smila, Cherkasy region, a Russian drone struck a nine-story apartment building: fires broke out on several floors, and five people were injured.

The Kherson, Dnipro, Zaporizhzhia, Odesa, Kharkiv, Zhytomyr, Kirovohrad, Mykolaiv, and Chernihiv regions also came under attack overnight. There are injured people in the regions, including children. Apartment buildings, private homes, and infrastructure facilities were damaged. Everyone injured is receiving the necessary medical care.

Every day, Russia uses about 220 guided aerial bombs against our frontline communities, which the aggressor’s defense industry continues to produce and modify despite sanctions. Pressure is needed on every supply chain for foreign components and every enterprise working to enable strikes against lives. Russian missiles, bombs, and drones can be stopped not in our skies, but at the production stage. I thank everyone whose additional sanctions measures are helping make this possible.

[George Kanev @GeorgeKanev2]

About Venus planet and the question: Why the Venus planet hasn’t moons?
But first this: Very interesting theme: whether the size of the Earth is increasing over the time and whether the mass of Earth increases as well. Let begin with this: The Moon was born from the Earth in the early live days of the two. The proof of such assertion is shown in the part I USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu where is calculated the centripetal acceleration on the Moon’s surface which exactly coincides with the experimental one, through the following newly found out rule there: To distinguish the planets from other objects in the solar system, there it isn’t enough to estimate the form of orbit (elliptic or more-less circuit one) and the mass of object, but also to calculate the own centripetal acceleration via the field formula: g=V.C/R.ln(1+V/C), where R – is the distance between the object and the Sun, V=w.R  where w – is the angular velocity of the equatorial area of the Sun. See USM part I https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu  If obtained result coincides with the same acceleration estimated by the low   g=G.M/r(2power) , then the observed object is planet…if it isn’t then this is asteroid or some another alien object! Let return to the pages: 18, 19 part I USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu where are made up respectively calculations about the Moon and it is seen that the angular velocity of equatorial plane of the Earth is: 7,29.10(power-5){s(power-1)} , but the angular velocity of the orbital plane of the Moon is  6,49.10(power5){s(power-1)}  We can see that the Moon revolving on its orbit a little be late than it should be, which means that at the birth’s Moon moment, the Earth spinning a little slowly than today, which means that the Earth was with low density at this moment. That conclusion is confirming by the similar calculations about the Jupiter and Saturn moons pages: 19, 20.  So for about 4 or so billions years, the density of the Earth is increases a bit because of the shrinking of the Earth’s sphere. In other words the size of the Earth is shrinking but not increases for about 4 or so billions years. That is in force about the other objects in the solar system.
Conclusion: Venus hasn’t moons because it isn’t spinning or spinning very slowly since its birth time from the Sun!
Now about the atmosphere of Venus: Let remind again shown very important formulae but this time about the planets on the solar system: Mercury as well the other planets in the solar system was born from the Sun because all planets centripetal acceleration fulfills the rule:  g=V.C/R.ln(1+V/C), where R – is the distance between the planet and the Sun, V=w.R where w – is the angular velocity of the equatorial area of the Sun. See USM part I https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu   Obtained result coincides with the same acceleration estimated by the law: g=G.M/r(2power) ,  Second important suggestion is that the Sun in fact synthesis all nature element until uranium, but not only iron how was estimated so far. It is so because of the essence of the field, see again Part I USM. So the core of the Sun is contains from super dense and therefore with huge gravitational attraction material - nuclear chain, most probably from uranium nuclei, see joromachine https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu and with super strong common magnetic moment. That is why the Sun changes its magnetic poles for about 11 years or so – because of the interaction between this core and the plasma surrounding it. How it is seen this core reminds the so called “neutron star”, which of course hasn’t any physical means because such creation is impossible, as well this is in force about the so called “black hole”. Such core possesses any star, even any planet but the difference is only in the size of the core – in smallest objects this core can be only centimeter’s radius (see again USM and essence of the field). The size of the core of our Sun is around 70 km in radius (see USM). For example proof about this assertion we can find out in rings and moons of Saturn, in their different direction of revolving (some of them), which shows that the core of Saturn also changes its polarization, similarly to the Sun, but very slowly, because the Saturn is far smaller and far cooler than the Sun. Now we can suppose that Mercury (because it was born from the Sun last in line) has most large quantity of heaviest elements in comparison with the rest of the planets and that is why Mercury is most dense object in the solar system. Maybe the core of Mercury is responsible for volcanic activity there and maybe it is in force about all planets?!
So we know that the Venus atmosphere is contains from far more heavier element than Earth’s which is in coincidence with the shown above and that is why the temperature there is so huge, but not because of some green house effect by the carbon dioxide, because the heavier elements on the Venus exist since the birth of the planets. Second whether the Venus possesses super dens core with huge magnetic moment, because we don’t measure such in the observation of the planet so far and why the planet revolves so slowly and in opposed direction? According to above, Venus must to possess super dens core again from uranium most probably with huge magnetic moment, but the interaction between the denser and contained from heavier elements enveloping the core, is very slowly in the time, which of course defines the revolving of the planet. It means that in the future we can see changing of the revolving of the planet not only as a direction but the speed as well.  G.Kanev

[George Kanev @GeorgeKanev2]

About Venus planet and the question: Why the Venus planet hasn’t moons?
But first this: Very interesting theme: whether the size of the Earth is increasing over the time and whether the mass of Earth increases as well. Let begin with this: The Moon was born from the Earth in the early live days of the two. The proof of such assertion is shown in the part I USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu where is calculated the centripetal acceleration on the Moon’s surface which exactly coincides with the experimental one, through the following newly found out rule there: To distinguish the planets from other objects in the solar system, there it isn’t enough to estimate the form of orbit (elliptic or more-less circuit one) and the mass of object, but also to calculate the own centripetal acceleration via the field formula: g=V.C/R.ln(1+V/C), where R – is the distance between the object and the Sun, V=w.R  where w – is the angular velocity of the equatorial area of the Sun. See USM part I https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu  If obtained result coincides with the same acceleration estimated by the low   g=G.M/r(2power) , then the observed object is planet…if it isn’t then this is asteroid or some another alien object! Let return to the pages: 18, 19 part I USM https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu where are made up respectively calculations about the Moon and it is seen that the angular velocity of equatorial plane of the Earth is: 7,29.10(power-5){s(power-1)} , but the angular velocity of the orbital plane of the Moon is  6,49.10(power5){s(power-1)}  We can see that the Moon revolving on its orbit a little be late than it should be, which means that at the birth’s Moon moment, the Earth spinning a little slowly than today, which means that the Earth was with low density at this moment. That conclusion is confirming by the similar calculations about the Jupiter and Saturn moons pages: 19, 20.  So for about 4 or so billions years, the density of the Earth is increases a bit because of the shrinking of the Earth’s sphere. In other words the size of the Earth is shrinking but not increases for about 4 or so billions years. That is in force about the other objects in the solar system.
Conclusion: Venus hasn’t moons because it isn’t spinning or spinning very slowly since its birth time from the Sun!
Now about the atmosphere of Venus: Let remind again shown very important formulae but this time about the planets on the solar system: Mercury as well the other planets in the solar system was born from the Sun because all planets centripetal acceleration fulfills the rule:  g=V.C/R.ln(1+V/C), where R – is the distance between the planet and the Sun, V=w.R where w – is the angular velocity of the equatorial area of the Sun. See USM part I https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu   Obtained result coincides with the same acceleration estimated by the law: g=G.M/r(2power) ,  Second important suggestion is that the Sun in fact synthesis all nature element until uranium, but not only iron how was estimated so far. It is so because of the essence of the field, see again Part I USM. So the core of the Sun is contains from super dense and therefore with huge gravitational attraction material - nuclear chain, most probably from uranium nuclei, see joromachine https://t.co/y9cF6PISTu and with super strong common magnetic moment. That is why the Sun changes its magnetic poles for about 11 years or so – because of the interaction between this core and the plasma surrounding it. How it is seen this core reminds the so called “neutron star”, which of course hasn’t any physical means because such creation is impossible, as well this is in force about the so called “black hole”. Such core possesses any star, even any planet but the difference is only in the size of the core – in smallest objects this core can be only centimeter’s radius (see again USM and essence of the field). The size of the core of our Sun is around 70 km in radius (see USM). For example proof about this assertion we can find out in rings and moons of Saturn, in their different direction of revolving (some of them), which shows that the core of Saturn also changes its polarization, similarly to the Sun, but very slowly, because the Saturn is far smaller and far cooler than the Sun. Now we can suppose that Mercury (because it was born from the Sun last in line) has most large quantity of heaviest elements in comparison with the rest of the planets and that is why Mercury is most dense object in the solar system. Maybe the core of Mercury is responsible for volcanic activity there and maybe it is in force about all planets?!
So we know that the Venus atmosphere is contains from far more heavier element than Earth’s which is in coincidence with the shown above and that is why the temperature there is so huge, but not because of some green house effect by the carbon dioxide, because the heavier elements on the Venus exist since the birth of the planets. Second whether the Venus possesses super dens core with huge magnetic moment, because we don’t measure such in the observation of the planet so far and why the planet revolves so slowly and in opposed direction? According to above, Venus must to possess super dens core again from uranium most probably with huge magnetic moment, but the interaction between the denser and contained from heavier elements enveloping the core, is very slowly in the time, which of course defines the revolving of the planet. It means that in the future we can see changing of the revolving of the planet not only as a direction but the speed as well.  G.Kanev