Tonight i woke up with an idea about sub-particles. We know that atoms have particles and that these particles have even more sub-particles. These are very sticky so they must have come from great energy sources. My idea is now that every time there is a big outburst of gamma-rays that these sub-particles are send out in to the nearest local universe and while traveling true mass at a certain moment they insert themselfs in to the atom-particles from the same family. So we could assume that atoms are in fact getting heavier as time passes. Now if we go further to the jets of black-holes in the center of galaxy's, they produce even more sub-particles which are spread over even far more distances putting there signatures of sub-particles in the local galaxy atoms. From here we can say that every galaxy has his own sub-particle signature and their own bizarre entanglements that where created inside heavy cores. I would assume that even our sun is sending out these sub-particles which would make us build up out of most of the suns sub-particles making us true offspring of the sun. We are solar creatures.

Grtz, Dirk.

Everything we know at what ever level exists as bubbles. Lets go to space. We have earth with his space-bubble, that goes on to the most outward regions around earth, high orbit i think it is called. To me everything inside that high-level orbit is part of earth. So if we are planning to clean up earth it should contain these regions in space as well. Then we have the moon with his space-bubble. If we go a level higher then we have our sun with its solar-bubble and then as last local bubble we have the heliosphere as the bubble from our entire solar-system.
We could even use this bubble vision in other things such as goals or subjects with their saving overlapping called buffers. Earth has great examples of buffering especially in nature and life. It is a way of surviving. To much or to little from everything can be used as an over-bridging in between extremes or as solutions to problems.
I think we should place that in our mind and take it into space. Buffering water, oxygen, food, fuel, materials, etc. would be a good start for the long run. Also as Igor stated a backup from earths life in space could be part of that, maybe as physical DNA-bank or with 3D-printing-DNA-techniecs.
In psychology we could use it also. Being open minded places a bubble in between left and right with open buffers to left and right. I guess that is called diplomatic or solution-oriented thinking.

Grtz, Dirk.

As from today we have a map from the moon from incoming body's on the moon, see yellow dots. That is not such good news for building something on the moon. But then i saw a structure in these impacts. If the moon has a metal core it would be drawing these to the middle of the moon away from the poles. So i drew a circle to image that core, you see it as the blue circle. Then i drew some orange lines closer to the poles and what we see is a saver zone from impacts. So i guess that would be a choice of preference for the moment.

Grtz, Dirk.

Link to original article: http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Operations/Space_Situational_Awareness/Learning_from_lunar_lights

Today i question the expanding universe, the big-bang, etc.. Lets start with a galaxy but i will also be talking about other happenings who follow one and the same theory. Lets start by imagining space as a big collection of bubbles. How big that the universe itself is i can not tell for the moment, we will have to find new ways to look even further as our strongest telescopes. But lets work with the observable universe.

A galaxy, it is a heap of stars that is captured by a black-hole aka heavy core. Some galaxy's have many black-holes, that comes from eating smaller galaxy's or sleeping black-holes without a galaxy. Lets imagine that our galaxy is in fact a bubble in space. The mass in this bubble is directed towards the center what gives a view of a shrinking mass inside the static space bubble. The same goes for all galaxy's in the universe, they are all bubbles next to each other till a bigger galaxy eats an other one. We could view it as soap bubbles that are forming continuously bigger bubbles till the balance is destroyed and an explosion happens in that bubble.

This theory should be the same on an atom level, space stays the same only the atoms get together to form a higher density or heavier atom with their cell border being the electron fields which occupy now a two atom space with double electrons, by manner of speaking of-course.

We can also fit this theory in our solar-system as the sun is attracting more mass to the center of our solar-system, space around it is not shrinking or expanding, it is the inner mass that comes closer together while electrons and magnetic fields are going the opposite way to counter act our part in the galaxy.

So we see two rules, gravity that makes mass heavier and denser, and magnetic and electrons that are the opposite of that force and are creating our bubbles. Atomic bubbles, star-bubbles, galaxy-bubbles and probably but not sure, also universal bubbles.

So if at what ever level a bubble explodes, it would be a good candidate to propose that the so called big-bang would have been an exploding heavy core or black-hole that was getting instable and that it would have been evaporating everything inside its potential exploding-force bubble.

Maybe the micro-wave background is the border of our local universal explosion caused by an instability inside our universal bubble. Now i can hear people say, but that is not possible, our universe is expanding. Ok, if we are on mass that is shrinking then it would be a false interpretation of expanding. Space stays the same, it is mass in the space-bubbles that shrinks where by we think that mass does not shrink and space expands, while it is in fact the opposite.

So, remember when you are blowing bubbles, then think of this bubble-theory.

Grtz, Dirk.

Lets not confuse laws with ideals. A law is a limitation where we can move in. An ideal has no limits.
For example: we have a law of moving for max. 50km/h. This law is for safety. It says that it is preferable to not go over that speed or else there is danger for accidents. So if you cross that safety limit then you are a danger for other people and you have to pay a fee.
Now, take ideal, you can move at whatever speed you want, but if you see a sign with 50km/h then you must be careful to not cross this limit because of the possible accidents. So it would be wise to take down your speed to not harm yourself or other people. If you do not consider the slowdown then you will have to pay a fee.
Most will say that the second part is a lie or misinformation, to me it is about a possitive mindset or reasoning.

Grtz, Dirk.

If we are planning to build on the moon then it is necessary to know what we can find where. The only  geologist on the moon was with the Apollo 17 mission, that was some time ago. Luckily we have better technology now and can from distance examine the moon, all be it not so profound as touching the real stuff. Ok, first we need concrete materials and maybe steam to mix and moisture them. I suppose the overall moon dust will be fine as a basic material. If we could find ice in the same place then that would be a surplus for a factory. Making concrete roads would make transportation faster and concrete plains would be good for landings and take-offs. Lets build with concrete on the moon.

Grtz, Dirk.

We live in an universe which we can see and touch. But there is also an opposite universe which we can mostly not see or grab. Sometimes there are special events in the universe which make us question if there are also other things in the universe. These events can mostly be understand as anti or dark things. I personally have a problem with these dark naming's, i prefer to name them as anti from something i know, this way i have a connection to our real world and it is not standing loose on itself. I have here a list of wordings i use to describe the goings in the universe, it is part of a bigger map. Don't worry if it is not 100% correct, it is just meant as an example to make the universe understandably in a simple way.

Grtz, Dirk.

I have here a link to a news article from the UN. It is about a cooperation between unoosa and an university. Now my thinking is if we could do not the same and sign a cooperation between Asgardia and the OOSA from the UN.

Link: http://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/informationfor/media/2018-unis-os-505.html

As our head of parliament, Lembit Öpik said in a today announcement, the main goal is to have a base on the moon in 2043. Ok, so that makes it clear on what to work towards to. Asgardia started in 2016 on earth and went into orbit in 2017. In 2018 our government and parliament was founded and now they have lots of work to do, to realize this. We have 25 years to try to reach that goal if everything goes well. I think the best thing we can do is to cooperate with the needed businesses or startups. Maybe by then we can just hire a dome on the moon, who knows. :-)

Ok, lets do a little survey of what you people think what the sequence is of the forces in space. I have below 8 forces that i have put in an order i think it should work in the universe. You can add or delete or change naming's, do whatever you see fit. Here is my at this moment temporary sequence.

1 dust-cloud
2 spinning
3 gravity
4 density
5 heating
6 iron core
7 magnetism
8 cool-down

An interesting article about satellites from https://thenextweb.com/ :

The new space race is all about satellites: Pros and cons of each orbit by Stewart Sanders

For most people, satellites probably bring to mind things like weather forecasts, GPS, or satellite TV broadcasting. Other common satellite applications, such as extending cellular coverage, connecting ATM machines, and restoring communications infrastructure quickly, among others, often go unnoticed since they’re not visible to users.

But with the FCC recently granting SpaceX, and OneWeb before it, a license to launch thousands of Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellites into space to deliver consumer internet services, as well as Facebook’s confirmation of its own plans to deliver LEO broadband access, satellites in every orbit – including Medium Earth Orbit (MEO) and Geostationary Orbit (GEO) satellites — are now generating renewed attention for their potential to shape the oncoming digital era and unite people around the world with gigabit broadband connectivity… from space.

While broadband needs have traditionally been met through technologies like fiber, copper, microwave, and 2G/3G/4G, satellites can now deliver connectivity with similar performance, including multi-gigabit speeds and low latency. It can work in tandem with, and in some cases completely replace these traditional internet transport methods. This “new space” industry is fueling strong market demand, along with ecosystem and technology innovation, leading venture capitalists to invest more than $1.8 billion in 2015, more than in the previous 15 years combined.

Whether you’re a service provider, government agency, enterprise or consumer — an entire multi-orbit satellite ecosystem is opening up above us, driving new opportunities for gigabit connectivity and broadband services. Here’s what you need to know about each orbit and its role in the emerging satellite universe.

GEO — Distance from Earth: 22,000 miles

The basics — GEO satellites have been in orbit for more than 50 years, with the first ones launched in the 1960s. These high-orbit satellites travel at the same angular velocity as the Earth, remaining stationary over the same spot (hence the name geostationary). A satellite antenna on the ground can therefore face a fixed point in the sky.

There are hundreds of GEO satellites in orbit today, delivering services ranging from weather and mapping data to distribution of digital video-on-demand, streaming, and satellite TV channels globally.

Pros — Because the antenna on the ground does not need to track the GEO satellite in the sky, its design can be quite simple. And by virtue of the geostationary altitude, broadband service can be started with just a single satellite since it can cover one third of the globe.

GEO satellites can provide global coverage with far fewer satellites than MEO or LEO as their distance from Earth allows them to cast a wider beam. As a result, it only takes about three GEO satellites to provide coverage that spans the Earth.

Cons — While their distance from Earth delivers coverage advantages, it can come at the cost of latency. GEO satellite beams travel the longest distance to their destination, making them less ideal for applications where low latency is critical – such as native 4G networks.

The higher orbit also means greater signal power losses during transmission when compared to lower orbit; something that needs to be accommodated in the design of the system equipment.

MEO — Distance from Earth: 1,200–22,000 miles

The basics — Historically, MEO constellations have been used for GPS and navigation applications, but in the past five years, MEO satellites have been deployed to provide broadband connectivity to service providers, government agencies and enterprises –  ultimately connecting millions of end users.

Current applications include delivering 4G LTE and broadband to rural, remote, and underdeveloped areas where laying fiber is either impossible or not cost effective – such as cruise or commercial ships, offshore drilling platforms, backhaul for cell towers, humanitarian relief camps and military sites, among others. In addition, service providers are using managed data services from these MEO satellites to quickly restore connectivity in regions where service has been lost due to undersea cable cuts or where major storms have occurred.

Pros — Their close distance enables low latency broadband delivery, with levels comparable to the performance of fiber transmission. This kind of fiber-like performance will become even more important as satellite capacity growth is increasingly fueled by high-throughput, data-centric use cases like broadband connectivity — instead of traditional video-centric applications. In addition, MEO satellite constellations can cover the majority of Earth with about eight satellites.

Cons — While MEO satellites already deliver very low latency compared to GEO, their higher orbit means they may not reach quite the same levels planned by the new LEO operators, although the difference may be negligible depending on the application.

Also, because MEO (and LEO) satellites are not stationary, a constellation of satellites is required to provide continuous service. This means that antennas on the ground need to track the satellite across the sky, which requires ground infrastructure that is more complex in comparison to GEO.

LEO — Distance from Earth:  120–1,200 miles

The basics — While there are several LEO constellations in operation today from companies like Iridium, Globalstar, and Orbcomm, they primarily serve low-throughput voice and data applications. The coming wave of LEO satellites intends to serve different markets, specifically those that require high-throughput connectivity like consumer broadband, mobile backhaul and enterprise VSAT for connecting remote sites and employees. Because these satellites operate closer to Earth than other orbits, their coverage area is smaller.

This is why the emerging LEO operators plan to launch hundreds — or in some cases, thousands — of these satellites into orbit to achieve global, continuous coverage. LEO constellations will continuously hand off communications signals and traffic across their vast satellite network in order to provide wide-scale, seamless geographical coverage to users. Since this generation of LEO satellites has not yet launched, here’s a quick look at what’s being planned and discussed.

Pros — LEO satellites are focused on delivering internet coverage that can span the globe, and with their close proximity to Earth, operators expect to offer the lowest latency levels of any of the satellite orbits. This proximity also means it is cheaper and requires much less fuel to launch a satellite into LEO than to launch into MEO or GEO.

Cons — Due to the high number of satellites required in LEO constellations there are expected to be high initial manufacturing and launch costs and more expensive ground hardware compared to GEO. Since the LEO constellations have not launched yet, the availability of satellite spectrum for that many satellites and coordinating traffic across them without adding latency are also questions.

Gigabits from space: The final frontier

Gone are the days when satellites were simply a “last resort option” for connecting remote areas. Like traditional, terrestrial connectivity services, satellites are fast becoming a standardized and mainstream connectivity option for delivering high-speed broadband services to people everywhere in the world, regardless of location — whether on land, or in the sea or air — and geographical conditions.

And as this new satellite ecosystem takes shape, the potential applications won’t be constrained to one orbit. Constellations are already operating together across orbits today, and as we move forward, we’ll see even more value created by optimized routing of traffic over multi-orbit networks.

For example, MEO constellations that use software-defined networking have the ability to automatically failover to GEO satellites for backup broadband services. And we are likely to see a convergence of LEO, MEO, GEO, and even terrestrial technologies, in order to meet the low latency and gigabit connectivity requirements of native 5G networks.

One thing is clear — the developing multi-orbit satellite universe is set to play a crucial role in delivering broadband access to connect the world and enable the digital era.

The Next Web © 2006–2018 The Next Web B.V. Made with ♥ in Amsterdam. Powered by StackPath

Local search words and displays of my google advertisment (see past blog) from belgium and surrounding country's. This could be extended to the whole world but i am afraid that it would cost to much, so i stay local here in europe and give a hint of related search words that display my advertisement. This is the result of approx 2 week with the latest formulation.

Edit: campaign halted, picture removed.

As it seems attractive to follow the at moment found exoplanets route for possible space journeys, i would personally go the other way around. Why do i think that. Well, the milkyway turns to the right i suppose, so if we would follow that way in regard to the exoplanets we would end up closer to the center with no way out due to the gravity from the spinning center of the disk. Also we would not make much progress as we have to over-win the spinning speed of the galaxy to get somewhere. If we would go the opposite route we would make faster displacements while we could also choose to stay in the more open space for possible exit routes towards possible strong radiated galaxy arms. Also while the galaxy grows older the outward worlds are all going to the inside and maybe we could find younger exoworlds at the borders of the galaxy arms where it should be cooler and with lesser radiation.

Grtz, Dirk.

Another force that i hear not a lot of in space is friction. Every time there is a contact between materials there is a possible friction due to spinning-speed, sliding-speed, in combination with a pushing-force and many others. The harder the contact the hotter it gets, by which one or both materials even can get to a melting point. I have no scientific knowledge about this, but my daily work for the moment is grinding aluminum so i know it can get hot sometimes. I can imagine that a galaxy has a lot of friction in the center by for example the differences in speed from the very dense cores. Even in our earth there is a spinning core witch causes friction between the inner layers. If we would imagine the universe as a bunch of molted spinning metal cores then that must be a big part of energy in space. And i guess a part of that heat is expelled as reddish radiation but most of it is vacuum wrapped in space and that is probably why there is no communication between the very hot cores and the very cold space.

Grtz, Dirk.

Going to try an advertising here in Belgium for some extra citizens. We will see how this goes on the national elections day here in Belgium.

Update1: advertising approved by google adds.
Update2: no succes from the election weekend.
Update3: new formulation and keywords.

Edit: campaign halted, picture removed.

As we are planning to travel in space it would be logic for the moment to choose the opposite way from the voyagers away from the bow of interstellar radiation and particles. Due to the speed the solar system travels in space it heaps up all radiation and particles in front of our forward direction. On the backside we have a longer tail of the heliosphere and we would need less protection but still we would need a protection. The greater our speed in the interstellar space the greater the need for a stronger shielding. As our shielding technology is at the beginning (sun sat), we should not leave the heliosphere before we have a proper shielding to go interstellar leaving the solar system behind wich protect us.

Grtz, Dirk.

Do not forget next time you walk in a forest that all these beautiful green leaves are giving you not only these fantastic colors but also protect you against bad radiation by absorbing them, cooling from shadow and moisture and give oxygen as byproduct from their energy fabrication. A planet without nature is a dead planet so we should take care of it as long we have no scientific prove of an other earth in the same conditions in a reachable distance or time .

Grtz, Dirk.