A bit more about my work

Here is the conclusion of a study I have done about the “Discourse of the method” by Descartes, which can be useful in order to understand my work:

In order to conclude, I have to specify that the Cartesian logic, being applied among others to mathematics and physics/chemistry, we can find in the education by which we are abided some murky logics which could easily make us call all what we have learned in question, as the complex numbers which have a quite unusual consideration of the square root relatively to the negative numbers ; as well to consider electron as negative energy seems quite heretical because God (about God in science see the link at the beginning of the last post) is according with existence and it is not really possible to admit that something is present after nothingness. Nonetheless by a good reflection these notions can be enlightened. But moreover though the notion of lack is a fact, the concept of the negative energy and the anti-particles seems to me anyway quite doubtful (even if not so much heretical), and the system of the Cartesian gravity which follows the logic of the flame which is going up seems to me at least as neat, knowing on the top of that, that the theory of the skies is well confirmed by observing the rings of Saturn and that the motion in whirl, dear to Descartes, looks like the one drawn by the arms of galaxies. The relative void can be supposed. But if we want to put it at the center of attraction, why for instance could it not fill by volcanoes after they have spit? Because in this case there is not apparently any anti-return valve like in the blood vessels. And even if this could be possible the value of the attraction should decrease because the vacuum should tend to be filled through time. Furthermore the theory defended by Descartes, of which he did discuss with Blaise Pascal, about mercury(1) , has been confirmed by the work of Mr. Torricelli, a pupil of Galileo Galilei, who has rejected the theory of void used by his master about the functioning of pumps, what did lead him to the concept of the atmospheric pressure ; and this is the induction of this result which supports well the rest of the author ‘s theory against the one of vacuum. Nevertheless, it is possible to notice in the Galileo Galilei’s letter to Fulgenzio Micanzio of the 19th of December 1634 that even him did possess another explanation than the one of vacuum. In order to go further, despite the irregularity of the gravimetric geoids, it is possible to add the fact that the atmosphere presents a high resistance and temperature at the periphery of some layers ; what is observed while the rockets are going out, and is not due to the density of the particles because otherwise they should go closer to the planet Earth, but here it seems that we are in the presence of particles like the ones of the second element described in “The World”, which are very light, and thus produce a pressure by following a rule close to the theorem of Archimedes, which applies here vertically from the bottom toward the top because the particles which are light are going toward the top contrary to the molecules of water which are going toward the bottom, and the force is not equal to the weight of moved fluid, but depends on its volume. Finally in order to sustain the fact that when there is an error somewhere the whole is not inevitably one (about the work of Descartes), we can notice that Aristotle as well was rejecting the absolute vacuum, what did not stop Descartes doing it (he was not following Aristotle).

(1) : See the letter to the father Mersenne of the 13th of December 1647.

Conclusion for my theories (not for the blog)

To read before :

http://eternal-cartesian.blogspot.com/2009/08/heisenberg-and-god.html


In order to conclude it is good to notice that the theory as an intellectual construction which for a part is not depending on some experiences and/or experiments makes look at the world in a different manner and thus motivates to develop some physical inventions which make evolve our way of life, by assuring us a power suitable for bringing us the peace as much as our theories are the best ones; according to what it is obviously better to search because it is not by waiting that some new ideas come to confront our five senses that we will be protected; it is better to go methodically so intelligently, and if possible without going too far from the common way of thinking, to the research of these ideas, which at the beginning will catalyze at least our interpretation; thus we can remark that the theory according to which the Sun is the center of our planetary system had been seriously considered by the mind of Aristarchus of Samos and even more certainly by the one of Copernicus, before the telescope could bring enough sensual proofs to the rest of the world by the intermediate of Galileo Galilei, according to what the sensual proof is not indispensable to the reality, even if it confirms this reality and that it is better not to take too much risks. The error remains true for the human thought but at least the ones that we have realized become as much marks in order to show us the way of the truth. Also in order to judge a work it is better to know it totally, after it is better to know how to make allowances and not to condemn the totality while only a part is wrong [1], what discourages to do any hypothesis, nevertheless it is mainly like this that the humanity is evolving, from this possibility to progress blindly toward the divine truths. Obviously this submits us to error, but it is better to do some and to progress than not to do any and to remain farther from God, whereas we want to know It the most possible, as is confirming the worships which have been developed in the different civilizations and as well tribes; on the top of that to include this infinite consideration in our projects clings us stronger to life, and reinforces even our familial and social projects, because to have the ambition to know what is not finishing and is reinforcing us always, motivates us to progress directly or out of the intermediate of some others more qualified in order to discover things, and to whom it is better to give the opportunity to think in the best conditions possible.

[1] Update 04/08/2011: For the scientific part of my work, what is present should be enough for the time being, and until now the corrections are the effect of my own judgment, my work did then resist critics.

Article 10

Water stems from the equilibrium of the energetic potential of stars which forms the different atoms and molecules, and in a usual way we can remark its gaseous condensable release during some combustions and mainly the one stemmed from volcanoes. Also if we can observe its presence on the Earth it is due to the atmosphere, and to the gravity and the inertia which are in it and which retain water; thus it is possible to find it in three different forms which are vapor (clouds…), liquid (rains, lacks, rivers, seas…), and ice (snow, hail, ice-floe…). About the liquid streams they have in part the same causes than winds applied to the liquid element and can be influenced by them, also tidal waves stem from volcanic activities and from the displacements of plates, where there is some thermal phenomenons but as well wave ones(1); and the variations of relief have to be considered for the fluvial flows.
Otherwise we can think that the motion in tides should come from an interaction between the terrestrial sky and the one of the Moon, as a result of what for a first hypothesis we could pose (within the framework of the hypothesis of Descartes about this subject (see The World))…

The rest of this article has been modified and will not be published here, in order to protect it. (If you want to read it, see here: 

https://eternal-cartesian.blogspot.com/2022/07/you-can-read-it-like-book-good-for-mind.html  )

(1): Also some enough powerful hurricanes can be accompanied by a groundswell of a considerable height.

Article 9 second part

As well gravity is especially remarkable in the layer of inertia the closest to the Earth, what could be due to the fact that the rupture between this layer and the following one should be greater than between the others out of a greater variation of the angular velocity, what should form a higher resistance to the displacement of some particles (see last posts). Thus considering the different ruptures so the different resistances it is normal that there is an impression of a relative weightlessness in some layers between the Earth and the Moon; what should be accentuated by the fact that more the energetic concentration forming the primary particles is low more the degree of fractality is high (1), then less the particles resist to a displacement, in the same manner than when the viscosity is lesser in the usual fluids.

(1) : See : http://eternal-cartesian.blogspot.com/2009/09/6.html

Article 9 first part

Gravity should not be without an energetic equilibrium, as well it is considered to have a constant force following a same gravimetric geoid, and posing that all equilibrium is limited in time except with a divine and absolute consideration, this implies that it should be maintained; therefore if I am not mistaken it is not good to think that the force could exist without any movement and that it could thus produce a variable quantity of it (4). So in order to explain gravity in a rational manner, we could suppose that it should be maintained by some flows of some particles of the two first secondary elements(1) and especially of some malleable ones and of some of the smallest ones in cycle which do not produce any warmth in a considerable manner(2), which should be applied in an almost homogeneous manner at the surface of an object, while they should penetrate also its inside by almost all the pores, what should reduce the importance of the mass and of the surface if it is possible to neglect the resistance of air; to our knowledge these flows have two principal and constant sources of particles, which are the light of the Sun and the radiation of the Earth. As well light could all the same penetrate the atmosphere despite the resistance at the rupture between two layers (see atmosphere in the article 8, if you want to read it, see here: https://eternal-cartesian.blogspot.com/2022/07/you-can-read-it-like-book-good-for-mind.html ) because it arrives in sufficiently dense and fast flows, nevertheless it should be this same resistance which should do that these particles could push on us, because when they should be in a concentration less dense than in the light, despite their velocity they should meet a resistance which should make them have a spinning motion or in circle being able to be developed in a helicoidal manner, and make them form some winds by a massive reorientation, but as well push the denser objects toward the bottom(3) out of the intermediate of the smallest cyclic secondary particles; this thrust should be formed because the very fast motion of the malleable particles and their size which lets them pass almost everywhere make them more suitable for going in the superior layers (see atmosphere). Thus the particles which should form this gravity should be at the basis the primary particles or malleable ones obtained by fractalization, which are endowed with an autonomous and very fast movement (2); and particularly the ones which are at the level of the body and should be on the way, following their progress toward the top and not the bottom, to take its place, next to pass above it with transmitting the motion especially out of the smallest cyclic particles; besides the flow already oriented of the particles toward the possibility to escape by the top orients easily the ones which are entering and diluting in the layer where it acts, knowing as stated previously that this flow is supplied with some particles out of a flow coming from under the soil out of the radiation of the Earth, and which periodically is reinforced by the particles coming from the Sun which are stopped at the level of the soil and by the clouds partly and have in the same manner a facility to tend toward the top, while they maintain a constant concentration in certain limits because the atmospheric resistance is not impossible to penetrate, also this resistance acts a little as a valve which should be more or less opened according to the pressure.

(1) : See : http://eternal-cartesian.blogspot.com/2009/09/god-and-elements-which-compose-it.html
(2) : See : http://eternal-cartesian.blogspot.com/2009/09/article-2.html
(3) : Light (except laser) should not oppose any considerable resistance to the bodies which can be detected by our senses because in order to act thus on these bodies it should pass by the intermediate of the other particles of the atmosphere which oppose a higher resistance and of which it should determine the trajectory in its direction without dispersing them; thus the action for conducting motion should depend as for warmth on the particles mixed with a flow of some malleable particles, because it should be especially the smallest cyclic particles, which do not produce any warmth in a considerable manner, which should be effective in order to transmit motion because they react normally better; but these particles should be in a higher concentration in the atmosphere than in light, out of the space (between them) that the concentration of the malleable particles implies, according to what the motion of the malleable particles should be better conducted by the atmosphere thus composed than by light, and when light is mixing with it, it is possible to suppose the presence of some beams of light, what at least the presence of some atoms make unavoidable out of their resistance in some masses to the luminous flow. About laser, the action is especially thermal, what is possible according to the proportion between the malleable particles and thermal ones (mixing forced at the basis), and even if the concentration of particles producing warmth need not to be very high in order to make it perceptible, the production of a relatively weak motion is possible out of their action. Lastly for the fission of an atom, the malleable particles being so much concentrated in an atom that at the moment of the phenomenon they should be deployed in a bowl, which for being diluted should not have any other possibility than to drive at its front all the most suitable particles in order to transmit motion and the others, because they could not avoid them considering the absence of any beam at the basis and their very high density.

(4) : Update 13/04/2011: See about Newton:       http://eternal-cartesian.blogspot.com/2010/09/criticism-of-gravity-by-newton.html