What Cosmology Missed

Let me explain my cosmology theory from another angle. The theory is detailed in the compound posting on this blog, "The Theory Of Stationary Space", July 2017. The posting that I use to briefly introduce it is "In Cosmology Everything Just Fell Right Into Place", May 2019.

There was just so much that is mysterious about the universe.

First, what exactly is time? It is something that is so basic to us, literally what life is made of. Yet I could find no real explanation of what time exactly is.

Second is the speed of light. In Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity everything revolves around the speed of light. The speed is always constant but time, mass and length are variable. We can measure the speed of light with precision but there is no explanation of why it is that speed, rather than some other speed.

Then there is quantum physics. In relativity everything revolves around the speed of light, and nothing can ever move faster than it. But in quantum physics, or quantum mechanics, the speed of light is not a factor at all. It can be shown that information moves instantaneously between two entangled photons, without being bound by the speed of light at all. But yet relativitists can also prove that their view of the speed of light is correct.

Then there is cosmic rays. Einstein introduced his Special Theory of Relativity in 1905. It is considered as virtually sacrosanct by the scientific community. A primary tenet of the theory is that the mass of an object increases with it's velocity, with the object having infinite mass at the speed of light. But this was before it was found that cosmic rays are actually particles moving at, or near, the speed of light. 

If a cosmic ray particle had infinite mass then it should also have infinite gravity, since gravity is proportional to mass, and should be able to wrap the entire earth around itself by it's gravity, but clearly that doesn't happen.

String Theory has been around since 1968. It maintains that the particles which we perceive as composing matter, such as electrons, are actually strings in more dimensions of space than we can see. There are myriad versions of string theory and I decided that it had too much going for it to not contain some truth. My cosmology theory is my version of string theory.

I noticed something that cosmology seemed to miss altogether. The thing that is missing is ourselves. A basic presumption of science has always been that we have an unbiased view of the universe, that our observations are 100% reliable as data.

But what if we don't have an unbiased view of the universe? My cosmology theory is that we DO NOT have an unbiased view of the universe. We are part of the universe and see it as we do not only because of what it is but also because of what we are.

I had not seen this in any other cosmology theory. It was always presumed that we have an unbiased view of the universe. For other branches of science, chemistry, ordinary physics, geology, etc. this does not make a difference. But in cosmology, the very nature of the universe, it does make a difference.

Time is so fundamental. But I could find no information about what time actually was, other than that it acted as a dimension so that space and time, in Einstein's theories, was referred to as "space-time".

What if the matter of the universe that we inhabit was scattered over four dimensions of space so that what we perceive as the fundamental particles of matter, such as electrons, were actually strings? This is my version of string theory. It doesn't mean that there isn't more than four dimensions of space, only that our familiar matter is scattered over four.

We can see, and move at will, in only three dimensions of space. The fourth dimension we perceive as time. If we are alive all of our lives, but only in one moment in sequence, that explains what time is.

That is why we can find no explanation in physics of what time is. We were looking in the wrong place. Time is actually within us. It is the movement of our consciousness, which only experiences one moment at a time, along the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains. We do not have an unbiased view of the universe because we experience this fourth spatial dimension as time.

That brings us to the speed of light. We can measure the speed of light with precision but, as with time, we have no explanation as to why the speed of light is as fast as it is. Yet, like time, it is so fundamental. In Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, mass, time and, length are relative, hence the name of the theory, but the speed of light is sacrosanct.

What is happening, of course, is that, like time, the speed of light is within us. It is the rate of the movement of our consciousness along the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains.

This is why we can find no explanation in physics of either what time is or why the speed of light is the speed that it is. Because both are actually within us.

But if the speed of light is within us, the velocity of our consciousness along the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains, then how can it be so sacrosanct to Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, when time, length and, mass are relative?

There is only one possible answer. The bizarre phenomena seen in Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity is not the way that the inanimate universe "really" is. Rather, it is the way the universe appears to us. The reason that there is a difference is, once again, we do not have an unbiased view of the universe. We see the universe as we do not only because of what it is but because of what we are.

In Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity the speed of light always remains constant. But as an object accelerates to extremely high speeds, strange things begin to take place. The mass of the object increases until the mass is infinite when the object reaches the speed of light, making any further acceleration impossible so that nothing can ever move faster than the speed of light. Time slows down as acceleration increases, until it stops altogether when the object reaches the speed of light. The length of the object decreases, until it is at zero when the object reaches the speed of light.

All of this has been proven experimentally many times. But yet there is a problem with it. The Special Theory of Relativity is from 1905, before it was known that the cosmic rays that bombard the earth from space are actually particles. The "rays" were originally thought to be radiation, hence the name. Cosmic rays are electrons, protons, alpha particles, and various other subatomic particles, moving at or near the speed of light.

This presents a complication for the relativity theory because if a subatomic particle is moving at the speed of light then it should have infinite mass. If even one subatomic particle is moving at, or near, the speed of light then it should be able to wrap the entire earth around itself with it's gravity, since gravity is directly proportional to mass, yet clearly this doesn't happen.

The reason for this discrepancy, in a theory that has been experimentally proven beyond doubt, is that we do not have an unbiased view of the universe. We see the universe as we do not only because of what it is but also because of what we are.

This discrepancy is because the Special Theory of Relativity does not describe the universe as it really is but rather the way it appears to us, and there is a difference.

The matter of our universe consists of strings aligned mostly in one dimension of four dimensions of space. The dimension in which the strings are mostly aligned is the dimension of space that we perceive as time, as our consciousness moves along the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains at what we perceive as the speed of light. Since we perceive that dimension as time, we perceive the strings of matter as particles such as electrons.

If a string, or bundle of strings, is not quite parallel to our bundle of strings then we will see it as a moving object as our consciousness proceeds along the bundle of strings comprising our body and brain at what we perceive as the speed of light.

Velocity is thus an angle in stationary strings of matter in space, which is why my cosmology theory is called "The Theory Of Stationary Space". The speed of light is simply strings bent at a right angle. The speed of light is the maximum possible speed because a right angle is the maximum possible angle. Electromagnetic radiation always seems to move at the speed of light because it radiates outward into space at right angles to the bundles of strings.

To understand why Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity describes the universe as we see it but not the way it actually is, because we do not have an unbiased view of the universe, imagine our consciousness moving along the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains at what we perceive as the speed of light.

As our consciousness passes by we see a bundle of strings being bent toward a right angle. Since the strings comprising matter are extremely long, when the bundle is at a right angle we see it's mass as all concentrated at one point. That is why an object apparently moving at the speed of light appears to us to have infinite mass. It's apparent length would also seem to be contracting to us, due to simple trigonometry, which is why length contraction apparently takes place when an object nears the speed of light.

From the object's perspective time, which is the movement of our consciousness along the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains, would seem to be concentrated at only one point, relative to our process of time, when the object reaches "the speed of light". That is why, according to the Special Theory of Relativity, time slows down at extremely high velocities, until it stops at the speed of light.

But the movement of our consciousness, along the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains at what we perceive as the speed of light, is unaffected by all of this, which is why the speed of light is the one absolute constant in the Special Theory of Relativity.

The next major complication for the Special Theory of Relativity is when quantum physics, or quantum mechanics, came along. But my cosmology theory has a neat explanation for that too.

The dividing point between the Special Theory of Relativity and quantum physics is the speed of light. In relativity the speed of light remains absolutely constant and mass, time and the length of an object revolve around it. Nothing can ever move faster than the speed of light. But in quantum physics the speed of light is not even a factor at all. It can be shown that information moves instantaneously between two entangled photons, without being bound at all by the speed of light.

Both relativity and quantum physics can be proven experimentally, but yet the two are clearly contradictory with regard to the speed of light. There is a way to resolve this discrepancy but not with the basic scientific presumption that we have an unbiased view of the universe. The only way to resolve it is to remember that we do not have an unbiased view of the universe. We see the universe as we do not only because of what it is but also because of what we are.

We saw above how the Special Theory of Relativity does not actually describe the universe as it "really" is but as how it appears to us. The two are not the same because we do not have an unbiased view of the universe. Exactly the same applies to quantum physics.

Electromagnetic waves are two-dimensional sine waves that are disturbances in the multi-dimensional alternating checkerboard of negative and positive electric charges that comprise space. The sensors in our eyes are based on the energy in light waves knocking electrons out of their orbitals in atoms to create an electric current. This is the only way that light can be detected.

According to my cosmology theory electrons are actually strings in four-dimensional space that we perceive as particles because we can only see in three of the four dimensions. Since electrons are one-dimensional strings they capture one of the two dimensions of a light wave.

This leaves one of the two dimensions of the wave. Since, in my cosmology theory, particles are one-dimensional this encounter with our eyes or measuring devices leaves a one-dimensional "particle" of light that we refer to as a "photon". 

This is why light is said to have both a wave and a particle nature. If any science students have tried to understand quantum physics but have been baffled by how light could have both a wave and a particle nature, this neatly explains it.

A photon of light can be split in two by a crystal that acts as a prism. The two photons are said to be "entangled". Information passes instantaneously between the two, no matter how far apart they are, without being bound at all by the speed of light. 

This is extremely useful. If we can keep one of the two entangled photons close by, whatever happens to the other one will be instantly reflected in the one close by. Since no one can intercept or interfere with electromagnetic waves without absorbing one of it's dimensions, this opens the possibility of instantaneous and absolutely tamper-proof communication. If the remote photon is tampered with, or even received by anyone, it will immediately be mirrored in the close by photon.

But the apparent discrepancy between the Special Theory of Relativity and quantum physics, involving the speed of light, is explained by my cosmology theory that, unlike "conventional" physics, both relativity and quantum physics are based on our perspective on the universe, that we see the universe as we do not only because of what it is but also because of what we are, but in two different ways.

There really is no speed of light, it seems to us that there is and everything revolves around it because it is the speed of our consciousness along the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains. This is why the information passing between two entangled photons, which must remain mirror images of each other, moves instantaneously without being bound at all by the speed of light.

Light is really a wave. It seems to have both a particle and a wave nature because the only way our eyes, and measuring instruments, can detect it is to absorb the energy of one of it's dimensions. This leaves behind a one-dimensional "particle" of light we refer to as a photon.

So many things just fall into place, that are otherwise unexplainable, if we accept that we do not have an unbiased view of the universe. We see it as we do not only because it is but also because of what we are. What is apparently so bizarre about things like relativity and quantum physics is not the way the universe "really" is but the way it appears to us.

Defining Cardinal Directions Beyond Earth

This is something that is simple yet revolutionary. I have never seen it pointed out and it is about time that it was. It involves expressing direction while traveling in space.

How do we express directions in space? On earth we expect direction with the cardinal directions of north, south, east and, west. To some extent we can extend this system into space. Since the moon is tidally locked to earth, meaning that the same side of the moon always faces earth and the moon doesn't rotate other than it's revolution around the earth, the moon's poles match those of earth and so it is clear which is the north, and which is the south, lunar pole.

Since all of the planets in our Solar System orbit the sun in roughly the same plane we can also apply this to most of the other planets. The north pole of the planet is the one closest to earth's north pole. 

The magnetic poles of planets tend to be fairly close to the geographic poles, because the magnetism results from the spin of the planet. So we can also define the north and south poles of the planet by magnetism. But this is complicated in the case of Uranus because the planet has apparently been knocked on it's side by an impact and it's south magnetic pole is actually closer in geographic direction to earth's north pole.

But what about outside the Solar System? Many "exoplanets" have been discovered in orbit around other stars although, at this point, we cannot tell much about them. How can we express directions on those planets, since their orbital planes may be nowhere near the same as in our Solar System?

I have a simple solution that would enable us to express directions on any planet or star in the universe. Virtually everything in the universe rotates, planets, moons, asteroids, stars and, galaxies. The earth rotates eastward. Why don't we just define east as the direction of rotation? Then, when we are facing east, west is behind us, north is to our left and south is to our right.

This means, of course, that the cardinal directions of north, south, east and, west will be relative. Since the rotation of Venus is opposite to that of the earth it's north and south poles must be the reverse of earth's. But this would be a simple yet revolutionary way to be able to express what we could call "local direction" on any astronomical body.

When dealing with planets or stars we only have to deal with directions in two dimensions, since direction on the surface of a sphere can be expressed in two dimensions. That is why the cardinal directions of north, south, east and, west are sufficient, two opposite directions for each of the two dimensions.

But what about directions within our galaxy? We live in a barred spiral galaxy that is rotating. But we have no real easy way to express directions in the galaxy. How would you describe which direction one star is from another in our galaxy? There is no easy way to do it. We cannot use the orbital plane of our Solar System as an effective reference point because it is not the same as the rotational plane of our galaxy, there is a difference of about 60 degrees.

But if we use this principle of definition of direction by rotation it becomes simple, except that we need two additional directions because we are now dealing with three dimensions, rather than two. Let's call the two additional directions "top" and "bottom".

Our barred spiral galaxy is rotating, that gives us a starting point. Suppose we are looking at our galaxy from outside, from the same plane in space as the galaxy is aligned, as if we were looking down at earth's equator. Consider the galaxy as rotating "eastward" but instead of calling what would be north on earth, let's call it the "top" of the galaxy with the "bottom" being in the opposite direction.

So if we were looking at our galaxy from outside, along the rotational plane of the galaxy which is congruent to looking down at earth from above the equator, and the galaxy was rotating from our left to our right, what would be north on earth will be defined as the "top" of the galaxy and what would be south on earth will be defined as the "bottom" of the galaxy.

But to define direction within the galaxy we still need another reference point. We could just define east within the galaxy as the galaxy's direction of rotation, as we would on planets and stars. The trouble with that within the galaxy is that, if we are near the center of the galaxy, east will be one direction on one side of the center and the opposite direction on the other side of the center. So doing it that way probably wouldn't work very well.

So to express directions within the galaxy we need some kind of reference point outside it.

It seems that every galaxy is part of some larger galactic group. The group that our galaxy is in is known as the Local Group. Our galaxy is not the largest galaxy in the Local Group. The Andromeda Galaxy has a double nucleus, making it seem as if it is actually two galaxies that merged together.

Every galactic group has a common gravitational center. Within the galaxy why don't we define "north" as the closest line to the line between the center of the galaxy and the common gravitational center of the galactic group? North may not be the same line because remember that we defined east as the direction of the galaxy's rotation and the line between the center of the galaxy and the gravitational center of the galactic group may not be in the same geometric plane.

Remember that, within a galaxy, "north" is not the same as "top" and "south" is not the same as "bottom". We are dealing with a three-dimensional space, unlike the two-dimensional surface of the earth, so we need six cardinal directions, rather than four.

So when we have "north" within the galaxy defined as the direction along the axis of rotation that is closest to the line between the center of the galaxy and the gravitational center of the local galactic group. Again the reason the two lines may not be the same is that the line between the center of the galaxy and the gravitational center of the local galactic group may not coincide with the rotational plane of the galaxy.

Once we have "north" defined within the galaxy, "south" is naturally in the opposite direction. When we are facing directly "north" "east" is to our right and "west" is to our left. Remember that "east" within the galaxy is not the same thing as the direction of rotation of the galaxy, as it is with the earth and planets and stars. The direction of rotation of the galaxy defines it's top and bottom but not the remaining four directions of "north", "south", "east" and, "west".

With modern astronomy and space exploration we definitely need an effective way to express directions in space. At present we usually try to impose the cardinal directions of our earth on other planets and it is not very efficient.

Here is another posting along these lines, about navigation on earth:

http://markmeeksideas.blogspot.com/2020/11/the-keypad-system-of-navigation.html?m=0

The Glorious Twenties

All right so this decade hasn't gotten off to a very good start. But let's give it a chance because it still has 8 1/2 years left. The decade may yet become known as the "Glorious Twenties".

The Next Scientific Frontier

In my opinion the next major scientific frontier should be robotic undersea archeology. 

The recent two hundredth anniversary of the death of Napoleon is a reminder that it was his conquests that brought the pyramids and ancient Egypt into the modern consciousness. Archeology in the Middle East has since focused on tombs with occasional entire ancient cities being rediscovered.

But what might the next step be? Ships have been sinking for thousands of years. There is sometimes underwater archeology of a shipwreck. Coastlines have also changed since ancient times and there is exploration of undersea ruins, particularly at Alexandria.

Compared with archeological sites on land exploration of sites on the seafloor would, of course, be very difficult. But what about the robotic technology used in space exploration? 

Exploring the ocean depths has a lot in common with exploring outer space, and can use the same type of technology. I am sure that we know quite a bit more about what is out in our Solar System than the sea depths of our own planet. 

The main focus of a detailed exploration of the seafloor would be shipwrecks. These shipwrecks become buried over time, just as do archeological sites on land, but the sites can be identified and excavated. But it will be much more difficult than on land and will require an effort that parallels the robotic exploration of space, and will use much of the same technology.

Archeological excavations on land tend to be undertaken by universities and museums. The fabulous uncovering of the entire ancient city of Ur was a joint project of the British Museum and the University of Pennsylvania. But detailed undersea exploration and archeology will require an organization on the order of NASA.

Much of the technology used in space exploration could readily be adapted for undersea exploration. The oceans have been explored, but only on a large scale and not on the local scale required for undersea archeology. Underwater archeology is certainly not a new idea but is almost always limited to shallow waters or large and famous ships.

By adapting the technology used in space exploration to explore the seafloor we could not only move archeology to it's next level, but would solve all manner of other mysteries. It is time to begin the archeological move from tombs to ships.

Remembering Britain's "Loser" Songs

During my youth, in the rock music era, British bands produced a number of what could be called "loser" songs. These were songs about generally being a loser, but with life in general and usually not having to do with romance.

Now I see the wisdom of these songs. There are a few examples that come to mind.

"Telephone Line", from 1977 by Electric Light Orchestra, is like the national anthem of loneliness and depression. It does involve romance but I classify it as a "loser" song because the singer is trying to telephone a girl and sinks deep into a gloomy mood. "I'm living in twilight", "I'll just sit tight with the shadows of the night", all because some girl isn't answering the phone.

There was "Superman" by the Kinks. This song involved the times, it was from the time of Britain's notorious strike-inflation spiral of late 1978. The winter of 1978-79 became known as Britain's "Winter of Discontent". The song is about a physically weak guy who wishes that he could be like Superman, "I want to fly but I can't even swim".

Another song was "I Wish I Could Be Like David Watts". It was about a less-than-stellar boy who wants to be like the star boy at school, whose name was David Watts. The Kinks did this song but, visiting Britain in the summer of 1978, I became familiar with the version by The Jam.

There is the song by The Kinks, "State of Confusion". This song seems to be about someone who is generally unable to cope with life. This makes it different from the earlier "Gimme Shelter", by the Rolling Stones, which is not a "loser" song because it is about the disintegration of society.

Gloomiest of all is the New Wave song "Are Friends Electric"? by Gary Numan. It is a futuristic song, supposedly taking place in future London. A guy's girlfriend is an electric robot but now she is broken. So he calls another robot girl to come over. I used to be fascinated by how the instrumentals convey a stark feeling of gloom.

But now I see what might be the point of songs like this. This life will be over before we know it. When the "winners" die they will be just as dead as the "losers".

Shouldn't we be more concerned with what comes after? Would you rather drift through life, but then go to Heaven for eternity, or be a real winner with everything that life has to offer, but then not go to Heaven?

Are we making too big of a deal about being "winners"? What difference will it make a hundred years from now? With very few exceptions you will be completely gone and forgotten a century from now. Of all the people who were alive in the 1920s how many can you name today?

Have you ever went to a job interview and were given a test to take while in the waiting room? Isn't this life really just taking a test in the waiting room? What really counts is what comes next. Maybe there is such a thing as taking this brief life too seriously.

What about the Apocalypse foretold in the Bible? We do not know exactly when it is going to happen and we are not to stop living because it is pending. But remember that this is like living on the Titanic. It would be wonderful to be a winner on the Titanic, but the ship is still going to sink anyway.

The values of the world define who is a winner and who is a loser. But if the world's values are in the right place then why is it heading toward the Apocalypse? Remember that Jesus said "The last will be first and the first will be last". This means that the world's values are upside-down and could be interpreted to mean that winners will be losers, and vice versa. When you face God all of your worldly status, which country you were part of, how popular and attractive you were, and how much money you had, will all mean absolutely nothing.

A part of being a "loser" is certainly willful. Whenever a society puts a lot of pressure on young people there is a rebellion against it. In China today there is the "Sang", or "Slacker" movement. In Japan there has long been the "Hikikomori". In the U.S. during the 1960s the catchphrase was "Turn On, Tune In, Drop Out".

Maybe it's healthier not to take life too seriously, and certainly some of society's values don't make sense. Where I live having a lot of friends is highly valued. Being surrounded by people is wonderful while being alone is terrible, which I consider as bizarre. It's more about control and "keeping an eye" on each other than about friendship. 

The "loser" songs are really a compliment to my native Britain. Only in a wealthy country that was confident of it's place in the world would people support music about their own people being losers. 

The "loser" songs, as well as the "state of the world" songs, are a reflection of the traditional Protestant dim view of both the world and human nature. But when we have too much respect for the way things have always been done we are less likely to notice better ways of doing things and when we see the world around us as having room for improvement it helps us to notice better ways of doing things, which is why traditionally Protestant societies have been so progressive.

With so many mass shootings today have you ever thought that if we would make losers feel a little bit more welcome they might be less likely to pick up a gun? There are movies about losers, but which usually have them committing violence. Songs like this make being a loser, at least as defined by the world, seem not so bad.

General Memories

I was born in 1960 and have collected a few memories.

I had a world atlas when I was a boy that showed Egypt and Syria as the United Arab Republic. The union didn't last because so many Syrians felt that they were effectively being ruled by more populous Egypt. Egypt continued to call itself the United Arab Republic, I had a later atlas showing that. The name was later dropped altogether. The same atlas showed a country in the Himalayas, called Sikkim, which later voted to join India.

We landed in Canada in 1965, just before I turned five years old. We settled in Niagara Falls. It is mostly forgotten today but not long afterward there was a massive electrical blackout that started in Niagara Falls and shut down Toronto and New York City.

Around the same time Canada chose it's current flag, the red and white maple leaf. I remember that there were a significant number of Canadians who didn't like the new flag, "Why does everybody else's flag have three colors but our's only has two? Is the government just trying to save money on ink"?

Canada had a great celebration of it's centennial in Expo 67, held in Montreal. There were advertisements for it everywhere.

In the late-mid 1960s there was a boat stuck in the river just above the American Falls at Niagara. It had been there for years. They finally got it out.

There was a museum just at the Canadian end of the Rainbow Bridge. It was known simply as the Niagara Falls Museum. There was a mummy from Egypt that spent over a century in Niagara Falls. The actual identity of the mummy wasn't known. It was later found to be that of Pharaoh Ramesses I, who had begun a new dynasty in Egypt. His grandson, Ramesses II, is one of the best-known pharaohs. The mummy was later returned to Egypt.

Just before we moved from Canada, in October 1968, a politician emerged who would soon become prime minister. It was Pierre Trudeau, the father of the present prime minister. Canada is usually a little bit more low-key than the U.S. about politics. But there has rarely been such enthusiasm for a politician. It was called "Trudeaumania".

The first major event after our landing in the U.S. in October 1968 was the election of Richard Nixon as president. He was running against Hubert Humphrey and Wallace. Most people around seemed to prefer Humphrey, who was the current Vice President, but Nixon won.

The other major news around the time were, of course, the Apollo missions to the moon. Apollo 8 went into orbit around the moon, but didn't land, around Christmas of 1968. The following July Apollo 11 actually landed astronauts on the moon. A few months later Apollo 12 landed on the moon again.

With the moon landings space shows were on television all the time, with people traveling in and colonizing space. There was Star Trek, Lost in Space and, the Jetsons. Later there would be Star Wars. Computer technology was primitive at the time. What would happen is that computer and communication technology would advance much faster than space travel. Instead of sending humans far into space robots and computers would make the journey and instead of people exploring space they would be exploring cyberspace.

The word "ain't" was very commonly used in the late 1960s and early 70s. Teachers used to scold us that "ain't" isn't a real word and isn't in the dictionary. The interesting thing is that now the word is in the dictionary it is hardly used any more. As for other words, "cool" has taken over the world but "groovy" has been left in the Sixties. I actually used to think that being cool was good but being groovy was even better.

In early 1969 came the news that a man had hijacked a plane and ordered the crew to take him to Cuba. It turned out to be the unfortunate Anthony Bryant. Instead of finding paradise he would be thrown in jail and finally released in the Mariel Boatlift of 1980. Back in the U.S., having lost his sympathy for Communism, became a conservative talk show host.

The summer of 1969 was filled with news. Not long after the landing of astronauts on the moon came the famous concert at Woodstock. Four hundred thousand young people, mostly from the New York City area, got together for four days of music.

If anyone remembers the rock music of the summer of 1969, and is keeping track, we have come nearly 10% of the way to the year 2525.

At a nearby department store, K-Mart, an old car was on display. The body of the car was full of holes. It was the first I heard of the 1930s outlaws Bonnie and Clyde. They had been killed in their car by machine gun fire. Their car was being taken around on display.

Probably the most dreaded word in the language was "cancer". It usually amounted to a death sentence. More than once I heard the dreaded news that someone had been diagnosed with cancer, meaning there was probably not much that could be done for them. Fortunately those days are gone.

Another area where dramatic progress has been made is in plane crashes, which used to be in the news all the time killing hundreds of people. Does anyone remember the crash of the plane that was landing at Toronto Airport in the summer of 1970? The plane suffered a tail strike and was going to circle around and attempt the landing again. But the plane came virtually straight down into a field, killing everyone on board. Fragments of human bone, as well as scraps of clothing and bits of luggage, were being found for a long time afterward.

In the beginning of 1970 a new passenger plane was introduced, the Boeing 747 which could carry many more passengers than the standard Boeing 707. The maiden flight of the 747 was made from New York to London, by Pan Am, and seemed to be getting the 1970s off to a very promising start. More than seven years later the crash took place that remains the worst aircraft accident not involving terrorism. Two aircraft collided in dense fog at Tenerife, in the Canary Islands. The Pan Am 747 in that crash was actually the same one that had made the maiden flight.

There was a lot of concern about pollution and the first earth day was in 1970. Today the issue is not with visible pollution but with global warming. But America, being a very visually-oriented culture, is less enthusiastic about battling global warming because it is more abstract and less visible.

In April 1970 America's Nixon administration widened the Vietnam War by sending soldiers into neighboring Cambodia. There had already been protests against the war for years. This widening of the unpopular war brought an explosion of protests on college campuses across the country, including nearby Buffalo State College. It resulted in four students being shot to death by the National Guard at Kent State University, in Ohio.

In music the so-called "British Invasion" was going on at the same time as America's Vietnam War. The two events usually didn't have much to do with each other but there was one great exception. The Moody Blues did a song in 1970 for American listeners who were dealing with the Vietnam War, and it produced some of the most memorable lyrics of the rock music era. The song was "Question" and the question was "Why do we never get an answer when we're knocking at the door with a thousand million questions about hate and death and war"?

In September 1971 there was the Attica State Prison uprising, over prison conditions. A group of prisoners took over the prison, holding prison guards as hostages, and presented a list of demands. Negotiations did not resolve the crisis. I was near my 11th birthday. I came out of school and a number of parents were waiting for their children. One parent was listening to the news on the radio and I heard him say to another that they had stormed the prison.

A monumental event was U.S. President Richard Nixon's visit to China in 1972. It was on television every day. Before that, the U.S. and China didn't even have diplomatic relations. This visit changed everything, creating the global economy that we have today, with Chinese-made goods to be found everywhere.

Christians had their own version of the Woodstock Concert in 1972, Explo 72 in Dallas.

Let's have some respect for mice. They are the only creatures, other than humans, to have been on the moon. 

Does anyone remember going to school in the dark, in the autumn of 1973, because the countries that had fought against Israel in the Yom Kippur War cut off the supply of oil to the countries that supported it? But the crisis didn't last long.

I was watching television when U.S. President Richard Nixon was about to address the nation. It was not known what the address was going to be about. What a shock it was when the president announced his resignation over the ongoing Watergate Crisis. Nothing like this had ever happened in U.S. history before and there was a great deal of uncertainty about what to expect.

The so-called Manson Family committed two sets of horrible murders in Los Angeles in the summer of 1969. The reason was to make it look as if black militants had done it. This would then set off a race war which, in the twisted mind of Charles Manson, would be the beginning of the apocalypse foretold in the Bible. The end result would be Manson reigning over the world as Christ. There was a member of the Manson Family who had not been involved in the killing, Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme. Almost as shocking as the original murders, six years before, was her sudden emergence and attempt to assassinate U.S. President Gerald Ford, in 1975.

If you listened to short wave radio during the Cold War jammers could be heard, which was basically just noise generated on the same wavelength as western broadcasts by the Communist countries that they were trying to broadcast to. 

During the 1970s music was listened to, aside from directly on the radio, on vinyl records that were played on turntables, cassette tapes and eight-track tapes. Eight tracks were used to create a stereo effect by recording from different angles on eight separate tracks. Eight track tapes have long since fallen into ancient history. Cassette tapes were instrumental in the Iranian Revolution of 1979 as Ayatollah Khomeini, while in exile, extensively recorded sermons on cassettes, which were then smuggled into Iran and became very popular.

I had an early pocket calculator almost as soon as they became popular. They were the size of a small book. But electronic calculators supplanted the slide rules which had long been necessary for complex calculations.

I was living in Canada for it's centennial in 1967 and in the U.S. for it's bicentennial in 1976.

An epic local event was the Blizzard of 1977, in the Buffalo-Niagara area. The snow was not new snow. Lake Erie, which is the only one of the Great Lakes that freezes because it is shallow, froze over early in the cold winter. Then there was a continued snowfall and the snow piled up on the frozen lake. Next, very strong winds from the southwest picked up the snow and deposited it across the Buffalo-Niagara region. A lot of chemical waste had been buried in Niagara Falls NY decades before, and a neighborhood built over it. The volume of water from when the snow melted in the spring caused the chemicals to reemmerge to contaminate the neighborhood. The drainage of water into the Niagara River was blocked by a highway that had been built. The result was the disaster known as the Love Canal. Has there ever been a "perfect storm" where more factors have come together?

I first heard of personal computers that were meant to be used by the average person with the Commodore, in 1977. This wasn't the first personal computer but previous ones were built from kits, and were not really intended for the average person. But the screen was all text. A graphical user interface was still a long way off.

The two Voyager spacecraft, Voyager 1 and Voyager 2, were launched in 1977. Voyager 2 was actually launched first. These two spacecraft have been a fantastic success, far exceeding expectations. I consider this as really the highlight of space exploration. One Voyager or the other have visited all of the outer planets. Today they, on different routes, have both left the Solar System and are still sending back data. They have time capsules for anyone who may ever find them.

In my opinion the best song of the rock music era is "Gimme Shelter". But I have changed my opinion before and might change it again. It is a 1969 song but I didn't pay attention to it until nine years later. Ironically it is a song about the apocalypse. Not necessarily the biblical Apocalypse but about the world falling apart into war and crime. The lyrics are difficult to understand but I think this was done intentionally so that a listener can enjoy the music, if they choose, without getting into the meaning of the song.

I visited my native Britain in the summer of 1978, after completing high school in the U.S. While I was flying over the first successful attempt to cross the Atlantic Ocean in a balloon, the Double Eagle 2, was also going on.

Does anyone remember New Wave music? I see it as a kind of British development. The three songs that stand out are "Teenage Kicks", by a band from Belfast called the Undertones, Kim Wilde seemed to be trying to make it more popular in America with "The Kids In America". "Are Friends Electric" is a gloomy futuristic song by Gary Numan about a guy whose girlfriend is an electric robot, but now she is broken.

The word "inflation" brings back youthful memories. The West rarely has serious inflation anymore. I know exactly why. Millions of people were working in well-paid unionized factory jobs. The trouble is that they were getting paid more than their labor was really worth and the economy was adjusting by way of inflation. It is no coincidence that inflation and the number of people working in manufacturing both peaked in 1979. In 1979 inflation in Britain reached a very dangerous 27%. Margaret Thatcher, followed later by Ronald Reagan in the U.S., purposely induced a nasty recession because that was the only way to stop inflation.

In 1979 I saw the Skylab space station go over not long before what hadn't disintegrated in the atmosphere landed in the Australian Outback. Satellites can be seen when it is dark where you are but the sun is still shining on the satellite. You cannot see a satellite in the middle of the night because the sun is blocked by the earth.

I flew from Toronto to London in the summer of 1980. I liked to read. A few seats away from me a man was absorbed in a book titled "The New Left". For the eight hour flight he was reading this book. That must be a really good book, I thought. Years later I saw him on the news. His name was Michael Ignatieff and he was running for prime minister of Canada. Sure enough he had been teaching at Oxford in 1980.

The highlight of the rock music era wasn't Woodstock. It was Live Aid in 1985. There was an apocalyptic famine in Ethiopia and two great concerts, in London and Philadelphia, were held to raise money to help.

I was watching the takeoff of the space shuttle Challenger live in 1986. There was one line of exhaust. Then suddenly there were two lines of exhaust. The space shuttle had come apart and the seven astronauts killed.

The first popular mobile phones appeared in the 1980s. They were like bricks.

The economic crash of 2008 is often related to the great crash of 1929. But there is one in between, in 1987, that tends to get forgotten.

Likely the most important thing that humans have ever done in space is the Hubble Space Telescope. It's achievements have far exceeded expectations. But the main mirror had been done incorrectly and it took a space mission to correct it.

Don't forget the former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien. He led Canada to the world's highest rating in the Human Development Index for about eight years in a row.

On 9-11 I was watching live news of the fire high in the North Tower of the World Trade Center, just after 9 A.M. The announcers were saying that a plane had struck the tower. It sounded like the crash was presumed to be an accident. But then suddenly the other plane flew into the South Tower.

On April 27, 2013 I was outside. It was a warm clear night. I have always been interested in space and habitually look at the sky. I saw an orange light moving slowly in the sky. It turned out to be a satellite, called Graham, burning up in the atmosphere. It was definitely glowing orange, although there couldn't possibly be enough oxygen at orbital altitude to sustain a flame.

In June of 2015 the world followed the escape of two prisoners in New York State, one was eventually killed and the other shot and captured. After escaping through a steam pipe that emerged on a street they carried supplies in a guitar case. What happened to that guitar case? I have not read that it has ever been found. The case would be a significant artifact if it could be found.

Toronto

I would like to express sympathy for how especially difficult life is during Toronto's lockdown. I have put together the earlier visits to Toronto, with the exception of "West Of Toronto" which remains as a separate posting. During my life not too far away I have watched the amazing growth of this city. It seems that nearly everyone wants to live there.

The eastern part of Toronto is known as Scarborough. Here is a look around, starting at Scarborough Town Centre.

There are multiple scenes following. To see the scenes, after the first one, you must first click the up arrow, ^, before you can move onto the next scene by clicking the right or forward arrow, >. After clicking the up arrow you can then hide previews of successive scenes, if you wish.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.7761893,-79.2565835,3a,75y,180h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWTPVHcOHF-ztjeDsOuZOUA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DWTPVHcOHF-ztjeDsOuZOUA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D81.32722%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

Proceeding downtown, some modern buildings that I have always admired are those of the Toronto Dominion Bank. They were the first tall buildings in downtown Toronto. I remember when the first two of these buildings are what could be seen of the skyline of Toronto, from a distance:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto-Dominion_Centre#/media/File:CN_Tempo_service_to_Sarnia.jpg

This is what the buildings look like from ground level:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto-Dominion_Centre#/media/File:Mies_van_der_rohe_3-6-2006.jpg

This is the TD Centre from the CN Tower observation deck. The rest of the images are views around downtown.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6425409,-79.3888189,3a,15y,317.83h,74.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSLjNFWFq_DU-9veMxBeUtA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Every large city has it's area of really expensive shopping. In Toronto, that area is known as Yorkville. The section of Bloor Street in this area is known as the "Mink Mile". The first of the following scenes are from the intersection of Bloor and Bay Streets, on the Mink Mile, looking into Yorkville. The rest of the scenes are from around the area:

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6697242,-79.3894366,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sC6kPk8EJ7J_QLVIf-S4zHg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DC6kPk8EJ7J_QLVIf-S4zHg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D7.1668229%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656 

I want to celebrate the amazing growth of Toronto. The last I knew, the population of the Toronto metro area was about four million people. The news came that it's population has now passed six million. This is the city where everyone seems to want to live.

The tallest structure in Toronto is the CN Tower. The idea began as a radio antenna platform conceived by CN, Canadian National, the railroad company. This explains why there are railroad tracks not far from the base of the tower. From there, the idea developed into what was then the tallest structure in the world:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CN_Tower#/media/File:Toronto_-_ON_-_Toronto_Harbourfront7.jpg

The most visible sight in Toronto is the pod of the CN Tower, where the observation deck and revolving restaurant are located:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CN_Tower#/media/File:Toronto_-_ON_-_CN_Tower_Turmkorb.jpg

The CN Tower was opened in 1976. I remember the news that it had surpassed the height of the Ostankino Tower in Moscow by a few meters to become the tallest structure in the world. Before that, I remember as a boy on a school trip by bus to the Ontario Science Centre, going past the tower under construction and watching structural pieces being brought to the top by helicopter.

Toronto's most important business is banking. It is the headquarters of Canada's "Big Five" banks. These are 1) Bank of Montreal 2) Toronto Dominion Bank (TD Bank) 3) Scotiabank 4) Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC) and, 5) Royal Bank of Canada (RBC). This is not necessarily their order in size or volume. Nearby is Bay Street, which is Canada's financial center.

Here is a photo looking toward the financial district from the CN Tower. The tall white building is First Canadian Place, home of the Bank of Montreal. The black skyscraper closer to the foreground is the home of Toronto Dominion Bank, including the two shorter identical black buildings next to it. The tall reddish building beyond the white One Canada Place, with the V inscribed in the structure of it's upper floors, is the Scotiabank Building. The mirror-like building, which is the fourth of the four tallest buildings in the photo, holds the headquarters of the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC). The buildings to the right, with the stepped terraced upper stories, as well as the reddish reflective glass building, are where the local headquarters of the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) are:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Downtown_Toronto_From_CN_Tower.jpg

Great cities usually have a square which is right at the center of the city. The square with the fountains, where there is skating in the winter, is Nathan Phillips Square named for a former Toronto mayor. In this photo, the stone building on the right is the Old City Hall, still a significant structure in Toronto with it's clock tower, the two facing hemispheric buildings are the modern city hall:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Phillips_Square#/media/File:Toronto_-_ON_-_Rathaus_und_Nathan_Phillips_Square.jpg

A view along Bay Street, Canada's financial center, leads to the clock tower of the Old City Hall:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_Street#/media/File:Bay_Street_May_2010.jpg

We also saw Toronto City Hall on the North America Travel Photo Blog. The reason that there are not more photos of Toronto on that blog is simply that I live close enough to Toronto that going there isn't really "traveling":

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/5492/3756/1600/2.jpg

The Eaton Centre Shopping Mall, in downtown Toronto, is the busiest mall in North America. This mall was originally supposed to be larger, but there was resistance to razing Old City Hall and the adjacent Trinity Anglican Church. How many malls get a million visitors a week, and not just at Christmas?

Following are some images, starting at the Ontario Legislature, and proceeding to nearby universities, including the University of Toronto.

Many discoveries have been made at the University of Toronto. The best-known is the discovery of insulin, but it is believed to also be where stem cell research first began and where a practical electron microscope was first used. The university was instrumental in identifying Cygnus X-1 as the first identified black hole. A professor at the university, Marshall McLuhan, coined the widely-used therm "global village".

The area around here is known as the "Discovery District", due to the universities, research hospitals and museums. The museums include the ROM, the Royal Ontario Museum. This area also brings back childhood memories because, when we first landed in Canada in the late 1960s, my brother was deaf and went for treatments at the Hospital For Sick Children.

Toronto is the largest city in Canada, but not the capital of the country. It is the provincial capital of Ontario. The red stone building in the images is the Legislature at Queen's Park, the downtown Ontario Government complex. It is called Queen's Park because that is the name of the park next to it. Notice the similarity in the red sandstone structures of the Ontario Legislature Building and the Old City Hall, seen above.:

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6618924,-79.3913047,3a,75y,328.87h,103.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZGa-FLJKwT7NCpg6sw63Rg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Downtown is not all modern skyscrapers. Two widely-known older buildings are Union Station, for trains and linking to the subway system, and the Royal York Hotel:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Station_(Toronto)#/media/File:Union_Station,_Toronto_(30427373561).jpg

Like the nearby CN Tower, the Royal York Hotel was the project of a railroad company, to give travelers a nice place to stay, in this case Canadian Pacific (CP). It was opened in 1929, and serves as the residence of the royal family when visiting Toronto. The two black buildings immediately to the right of the Royal York Hotel are part of the Toronto Dominion Bank Complex, described above. The reddish section of building to the far right of the photo is the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairmont_Royal_York#/media/File:Toronto_-_ON_-_Royal_York_Hotel.jpg

One of the most famous food marketplaces in the world is the St. Lawrence market, in the oldest section of Toronto near Lake Ontario. This was actually the location of Toronto's original city hall:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Lawrence_Market#/media/File:St._Lawrence_Market_(Unsplash).jpg

Following are some images around the Old Town area of the St. Lawrence Market. In the first image, there is something of interest to older residents of the Canadian side of Niagara Falls. Does anyone remember the Clifton Memorial Arch, near the falls? I remember it when I first landed nearby as a boy. It was removed in 1968 after it was decided that it was a hindrance to traffic. I found out that the circular medallions, on opposite sides at the top of the arch, were removed before it was demolished. These two circular medallions are now mounted together on Front Street, diagonally opposite the St. Lawrence market. Look at the circular image of a ship on the sunlit side of the arch, near the top, in the upper right corner of the photo. To see this, you will have to enlarge the photo by pressing the "+" sign several times:

http://www.nflibrary.ca/nfplindex/show.asp?id=380332&b=1

Now, look at the circular medallion of a ship, mounted on the sidewalk on Front Street. The brick St. Lawrence Market is on the diagonal opposite side of the intersection with Jarvis Street:

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6497163,-79.3715867,3a,37.5y,82.39h,84.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spQ5mn_2AxM9mrcv5cdGb0w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Many cities have claimed to have had the first system of electric streetcars, including Toronto. At any rate, Toronto today definitely has the largest system of electric streetcars in use in North America.

The one disadvantage of Toronto is, of course, the winter. Many people may not know that Toronto has actually solved that. There is what is believed to the the most extensive underground city in the world, known as PATH. Most of the tall buildings have shops, cafes and, restaurants at the lower level, below ground. All of these, as well as the malls, are linked by below-ground walkways. One can spend all day going around the stores within PATH, and scarcely be aware that it is winter. The same can be said for the heat of the summer. It may actually be better than walking on the surface because there is no vehicular traffic. 

I have never spent much time in PATH, simply because I usually go to Toronto on a nice day and there is no reason to spend the time below ground, but this system is really incredible and is easy to access by the subway.

The best-known street in Toronto is the north-south Yonge Street. Not many individual streets are known across the world, and this is one of them. I read that Yonge Street was actually named for a Canadian expert on ancient Roman roads. Just to the left of where that photo was taken is another downtown square, around which Toronto revolves, Yonge-Dundas Square. Here is a scene of that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yonge-Dundas_Square#/media/File:Dundas_Squire_Evening_Saturday.jpg

Just about every major ethnic group in the world has a neighborhood in Toronto. The most visible is Chinatown, west of Yonge Street and the Eaton Centre, although this is not the only Chinatown in Toronto:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinatown,_Toronto#/media/File:Chinatown_toronto_spadina_avenue.JPG

Following are some images of Casa Loma and the older Toronto neighborhoods around it. Of Course, Casa Loma is not a "real" castle from medieval times, but it must have been what a great castle would have been like back then.

You know that you are in Toronto when you see older homes of the "Bay and Gable" design. I have not seen this home structural design anywhere else, the two-story bay windows capped by the gabled roof. This is in the Annex, a neighborhood adjacent to Toronto University that is home to many students and faculty:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay-and-gable#/media/File:Bay-and-gable_2.JPG

Here is starting inside Casa Loma, and the surrounding area:

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6780646,-79.4094724,3a,75y,57.05h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s69lc5T_XAQ6oF1PLx-xpbg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D69lc5T_XAQ6oF1PLx-xpbg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D48.133572%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656

Every city has it's neighborhood of mansions, of people who made a fortune in one way or another. Central Toronto's such area is Rosedale.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosedale,_Toronto#/media/File:Rosedale_Park_playground.JPG

Both World Wars were followed by settlement of planned communities in central Toronto. After the First World War, it was Leaside:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaside#/media/File:Leaside.jpg

After the Second World War, it was Don Mills. In the U.S., Levittown, NY, and then a second Levittown in Pennsylvania, became the prototypes for postwar suburban development. I think of Don Mills as fulfilling a similar postwar suburban development prototype for Toronto, and the rest of Canada:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Mills#/media/File:Don_Mills_homes.JPG

Here is something that I find really amazing. Have you ever wondered what the definition of the word "progress" is? Well, here is a definition of progress in three photographs.

This is downtown Toronto in 1970. The two modern black buildings are the complex of the Toronto Dominion Bank, that we saw above. The green-topped building to their right is the Royal York Hotel. The photo of the rail tracks is taken from near where the CN Tower will soon be built. You can see "CN" on the rail cars:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto-Dominion_Centre#/media/File:CN_Tempo_service_to_Sarnia.jpg

Next, here is a photo, from the North America travel photo blog, that I took from the CNE (Canadian National Exhibition) in 1989, 19 years after the above photo was taken. If you pick out the two black Toronto Dominion buildings, near the center of the photo, you can see that a third and shorter Toronto Dominion building has been added. The taller light-colored building immediately left of the Toronto Dominion buildings is First Canadian Place, the home of the Bank of Montreal. Showing in the background is the reddish Scotiabank building, with the "V"-shape inscribed into it's upper floors. To the right of all this is, of course, the CN Tower, and all around are other tall buildings that were not there 19 years before. If you look closely, you can see the pointed top of the Royal York Hotel, between the Toronto Dominion buildings and the CN Tower:

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/5492/3756/1600/4.jpg

Now, look at this more recent photo. The white First Canadian Place building, with the Bank of Montreal, is there, as are the black buildings of the Toronto Dominion Complex, to it's right. In the background is the reddish Scotiabank building, with the V-shape inscribed into it's upper floors. The stone structure of the Royal York Hotel, with it's green-peaked roof, can be seen in the lower left of the photo. But there are an incredible number of modern buildings that were not there in 1989. This is progress, Toronto-style:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Downtown_Toronto_From_CN_Tower.jpg 

NORTH YORK

In the postwar period, as the Baby Boom generation emerged, what we could describe as a "new" Toronto, to the north of the city, also emerged. The city had to grow to support the burgeoning population and immigration, but Lake Ontario blocked expansion to the south. This new, mostly postwar, version of Toronto is known as North York.

The reason that the name of "York" is to be seen all over Toronto is that was the original name of the city, starting with Fort York. I believe that the name was changed to differentiate it from New York City. The House of Lancaster may have defeated the House of York in the "War of the Roses", that ended the Plantagenet era, but the House of York has been much more successful since then at getting it's name everywhere.

Different countries had their own ways of managing the necessary postwar development, to accommodate the Baby Boom. America built it's prototype postwar suburb in Levittown, New York, and then the second Levittown in Pennsylvania. Britain established the prototype postwar "new town" in Milton Keynes. Toronto seems to have used both concepts in the growth of North York.

From the top of the CN Tower downtown, the skyline of another city can be seen to the north. That is North York, although since the sweeping municipal amalgamation of 1998 it has administratively been part of Toronto. By some accounts Highway 401, where it passes through North York, is the busiest section of highway in North America.

Like any city, North York has it's wealthy areas, as well as those that are somewhat less than wealthy. The center of wealth in North York is around the York Mills area. The areas to the northwest, Lawrence Heights and especially Jane-Finch are perceived as less fortunate, although I do not believe that the Jane-Finch area deserves anything like the rap it sometimes gets.

These buildings are a familiar sight from the Don Valley Parkway, through North York:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flemingdon_Park#/media/File:The_Palisades.jpg

The outside of the Ontario Science Centre reminds me of youthful school outings there:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_Science_Centre#/media/File:0OSC_Sept23_06.jpg

Let's start our look at North York at the intersection of Yonge Street and Bishop Avenue, which is where both Finch Metro Station and Finch Bus Station are located.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.7816823,-79.4158463,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sHislTpB_jjnzh6pRJ9kfig!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DHislTpB_jjnzh6pRJ9kfig%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D304.58841%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656

Moving westward, let's have another look beginning outside the Yorkdale Mall:

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.7263103,-79.4521981,3a,75y,184.13h,87.87t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s_Jz7lFIjx30AAAQJOMDjTg!2e0!3e2!7i13312!8i6656

Here are some views of York University, starting in the Student Centre:

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.7739005,-79.5030816,3a,75y,180h,90t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1s2Jo3GGSrioYAAAQvOdjbdg!2e0!3e2!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D2Jo3GGSrioYAAAQvOdjbdg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D64.624062%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656

Finally Jane-Finch, named for the intersection of Jane Street and Finch Avenue, has the housing towers seen in many North York neighbourhoods, but looks like a nice place to me. Here are some scenes of the area, starting in the Jane-Finch Mall:

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.7558776,-79.5157189,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1s7nyAM4rRrpoAAAQfDmzs4A!2e0!3e2!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D7nyAM4rRrpoAAAQfDmzs4A%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D24.754307%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656

The Missing Quark Stars

In the postwar period so many new subatomic particles were discovered that it was referred to as the "Particle Zoo". But there were some physicists who didn't believe that there could really be this many separate particles.

As it turned out there was too many fundamental particles. What emerged is Quark Theory. Quarks were believed to be particles that are even more fundamental, and that combine together with each other to form what we see as many of the fundamental particles.

Particles that are composed of quarks are called hadrons. Two very important hadrons are protons and neutrons, which form the nuclei of atoms. Not all subatomic particles are composed of quarks. Electrons are of a class of particles called leptons, which do not involve quarks.

There are theorized to be six kinds of quarks, and also their corresponding antiquarks of antimatter. But two of these quarks, up and down quarks, are far more important than the others. It is believed that, if all quarks other than up and down quarks vanished tomorrow, only particle physicists would notice.

Up and down quarks are charged particles, but have charges in thirds relative to the equal but opposite charges on protons and electrons. These quarks combine in thirds to produce hadrons like protons and neutrons. 

An up quark has a charge of + 2 / 3 and a down quark has a charge of - 1 / 3. So two up quarks and one down quark form a proton, with a net charge of +1, and two down quarks and one up quark form a neutron, with a net charge of zero.

With that understanding of quarks let's move on to the end of the lives of stars. The largest stars may collapse into a black hole or explode in a supernova. Our own sun will do neither, it will simply burn out.

Stars form when enough matter is pulled together by it's mutual gravity to overcome the electron repulsion that keeps stars separate from one another, and crunch smaller atoms together into larger ones. A new larger atom contains less overall energy than the smaller atoms which were crunched together to form it. This excess energy is released as radiation and this is why stars shine. A planet does not shine because it is not massive enough for it's internal gravity to overcome electron repulsion.

A star is an equilibrium between the outward force of the energy being released by fusion in the star's center and the inward force of gravity. A star may swell, or explode in a supernova, when the process of fusing successively heavier atoms together means that the energy being released per time is increasing, and this upsets the equilibrium.

But the end of the star comes from the opposite direction, when the star runs out of fusionable fuel but is not large enough to explode in a supernova. The ordinary fusion process cannot go beyond iron. This upsets the equilibrium by removing the outward pressure of the energy being released, causing the star to collapse inward.

Stars are composed of atoms, with lighter atoms continuously being combined by fusion into heavier atoms. When the star collapses the structure of the atoms are crushed by the sheer mutual gravity of the star's mass, now no longer opposed by the energy released by fusion. 

When fusion takes place the new heavier elements require more neutrons, relative to protons, in the nucleus. What happens is that, during fusion, an electron is crunched into a proton to produce a neutron. This is known as K-capture.

When the atomic structure of the star collapses this is what happens to all of the atoms. When the process is complete there are no more protons and electrons, all that there is left is an extremely dense mass of neutrons. It is now referred to as a neutron star, although it is not technically a star because no fusion is taking place.

The extreme density of a neutron star makes further collapse possible and eventually a black hole may form. A black hole is the most dense possible concentration of matter. It is known that black holes do not last forever. They give off radiation, called Hawking Radiation, and eventually evaporate.

Now, here is the question of the day. If the structure of stars that have collapsed into a neutron star can collapse still further, into a black hole, and neutrons are composed of quarks, then what about "quark stars"?

The existence of quark stars was theorized more than fifty years ago, but none have ever been found. The next step in the collapse should be for the neutrons of a neutron star to collapse into their component quarks. Many black holes have been found, and many neutron stars, but, as of yet, no quark stars.

How could this be? The way I see it, there are two possibilities. 

The first, of course, is that quark theory was incorrect all along. But it is believed by so many people and it explains so much.

My cosmology theory opens the way to another possibility. The theory, detailed in the compound posting on this blog, "The Theory Of Stationary Space", explains everything in the universe, both matter and space, as being composed of negative and positive electric charges. Space is a perfectly alternating pattern of negative and positive charges, in multiple dimensions. Matter is any concentration of like charges, held together against their mutual repulsion by energy.

The majority of the charge interfaces in matter are actually between opposite charges, and this is what holds the units of matter, such as atoms or neutrons, together. Since negative and positive electric charges must always balance out to zero, and particles that compose matter are usually charged, matter must consist of some structures, such as atoms or neutrons, that have a net charge of zero.

We cannot discern any structure of matter within black holes. Yet, given that black holes do not just explode in a gigantic matter-antimatter reaction, their matter must consist of some kind of structure.

In my cosmology theory the reason that black holes give off radiation, and eventually evaporate, is that their extreme gravitational pressure is enough to cause charge displacement to take place. Adjacent like charges, which are trying to mutually repel, are under so much pressure that negative and positive charges can "trade places". This does not mean any charged particles but the fundamental electric charges that comprise everything in the universe.

But that brings groups of opposite charges into direct contact with each other. They gradually rearrange themselves back into the alternating charge pattern of empty space, and in doing so release the energy that was holding them together. This is why a black hole gives off radiation and eventually evaporates, turning back into empty space.

But still, there must be some structure of matter within a black hole, the arrangement of the charges that comprise matter. What could that structure be? Has anyone ever thought that maybe it is quarks? That a black hole actually is a quark star? It would explain why quark theory explains so much, but we just can't find any quark stars that should exist.

The Wave Model Of Economics

Remember the posting, "The Wave Model Of Economics" on the world and economics blog. 

In this model waves exist in the economy over time. A "right wave" tends to be followed by a "left wave", which is followed by another "right wave". 

A country's leftward and rightward political parties tend to alternate in the same way but these left and right waves are longer than the typical alternation between rightward and leftward parties. The posting focuses on the U.S. but the same principle applies, at least to some extent, to any free-market democracy.

During a right or left wave both parties continue to alternate in power but during the right wave the whole system leans more to the right, and during the left wave to the left. Bill Clinton was a Democrat president during a right wave and Donald Trump was a Republican president during a left wave.

Joseph Biden's announcement of plans for the economy is moving the economy leftward. A recent article in Time Magazine made it sound like this is something new. 

But I see this as a continuation of the left wave that began with the Obama presidency. The changes made by Donald Trump were mainly about "making America great again" from a global perspective. The economic changes that the Trump administration made in the U.S., such as cutbacks in food stamps and Medicaid, were certainly rightward, but were not enough to terminate the left wave that was in progress.

The underlying reason for these "waves" in the economy, as well as the usual alternation of leftward and rightward parties, is complexity. Our economy is as complex as we are. This makes it difficult to grasp the entire economic picture. It is easier for each of us to see either the left or the right. 

So what ends up happening is that first we go too far in one direction. We then try to compensate for it by going in the opposite direction, only to go too far so that we then have to compensate for that by going back in the first direction, and on and on.

Here is a link to "The Wave Model Of Economics":

http://markmeekeconomics.blogspot.com/2011/08/wave-model-of-economics.html?m=0

The Rule Of Eight

The "Rule Of Eight" links electrons to planets and continents. You may be wondering what electrons, planets and, continents have in common. I have not added anything to it in a while but remember the theory, "The Flow Of Information Through The Universe" January 2016.

That theory is about how the universe reuses information. There is only a limited amount of information in the universe so large-scale structures must be based on the same information as the more basic, lower-scale structures. This is simply because there is no information from anywhere else for the large-scale structures.

One of the most obvious examples of this reuse of information that I use is the resemblance between the orbits of astronomical bodies and the orbitals of the electrons in the atoms of which these astronomical bodies are composed. There is no new information from anywhere when astronomical bodies, like planets and stars, form from atoms, so the same information that is in the structures of the atoms must be reused.

The orbits of moons around planets, and of planets around stars, and of stars around the center of the galaxy, very much resembles the orbitals of electrons in atoms. It also applies to the mutual orbits of stars in multiple star systems. Planets and stars also tend to rotate, just as electrons have spin.

"The Flow Of Information Through The Universe" also works in other ways. There are two "Rules Of Common Atoms", one for the universe and one for our biology. Color does not really exist, it is just how our eyes and brains interpret different wavelengths of visible light. Could it be a coincidence that the number of atoms that are really common in our biology, about six, is the same as the number of separate colors that we see? 

Could it also be a coincidence that the number of really common atoms in the universe is the same as the number of different types of galaxies? The information for the number of colors that we see and the number of types of galaxies had to come from somewhere.

We saw another way that "The Flow Of Information Through The Universe" works in the compound posting on this blog, "The Configuration Of The Solar System Made Really Simple" .

The present Solar System, the sun and planets, formed from the debris of a previous large star that exploded in a supernova. The debris fell back together by gravity. The ordinary fusion process in stars only goes as far as iron. This is why iron is so common in the inner Solar System, it is the most common element on earth by mass. What I found so interesting is that the distances of the planets from the sun can be traced to the factors that bring about the 56 nucleons in an iron atom. This is an ideal example of the reuse of information.

I actually consider "The Flow Of Information Through The Universe" as no longer a separate theory. It is closely related to another theory on this blog, "The Lowest Information Point" and, as we saw in that theory, "The Flow Of Information Through The Universe" has now been incorporated into it.

With that background, let's move on to another example to add to "The Flow Of Information Through The Universe".

Atoms can have multiple shells of electron orbitals. In ordinary atoms, that are not ions, the number of negatively-charged electrons in the orbitals matches the number of positively-charged protons in the nucleus, so that the atom has a net charge of zero.

But the maximum number of electrons that any atom can have in it's outermost shell is eight. It is this outermost electron shell that governs the chemical behavior of atoms. As a general rule, when atoms combine together to form molecules, the "Octet Rule" is followed that tries to get each atom in the molecule surrounded by eight electrons.

The arrangement of the Periodic Table of the Elements is based on the chemical behavior of an atom being governed by the number of electrons in it's outermost shell. That is why there are eight columns in the table. Elements in the same column have similar chemical behavior because they have the same number of electrons in their outermost shells.

That maximum of eight is information and, since everything is composed of atoms, we should, if my theory of "The Flow Of Information Through The Universe" is correct, expect to see this number eight reflected in the large-scale universe somehow, since everything is composed of atoms.

Since the orbits of the planets bear so much resemblance to the orbitals of electrons in atoms, how much of a coincidence can it be that there are eight planets?

In ways that we may not yet understand, the Solar System "conspired" to prevent the asteroids between Mars and Jupiter from coalescing, by gravity, into a planet. This made sure that there would only be eight planets, matching the maximum number of outermost electrons in the atoms of which those planets are composed.

By the same token the earth's moon and Charon, the moon of Pluto, could possibly have been planets themselves but the "Rule Of Eight" went into effect, causing our moon and Charon to join planets so that there would only be eight planets.

This means that, with regard to other stars that we can see have solar systems, the "Rule Of Eight" means that there will always be a bias towards having eight planets in the solar system. This does not absolutely mean that there will always be eight planets, but it is the most likely number.

What about the number of continents on earth? As the earth rotates it's continents can be said to move around the center of the earth much like the electrons in orbitals moving around the nucleus of the atom. 

It has recently been established that the vast shallow area around New Zealand is actually a continent, although it is mostly underwater. This means that there are eight continents. It looks like the "Rule Of Eight" has applied again.

Can you see how this concept of "The Flow Of Information Through The Universe", which must be taking place because there is no information from anywhere else to form the large-scale structures, enables us to "see ahead" how the universe must operate, even to things that we haven't "discovered" yet?

I find this to be a very useful concept.

Dating Breakups

I would just like to express one opinion about dating and relationships, and things like that.

We have gotten to the point where the end of a relationship is a contest. The one who does the breaking up is considered as the "winner" of the relationship, and the one who gets broken up with is the "loser".

This is wrong. It is just a reflection of how nasty our values are in general. If I was going to go through a breakup I would much prefer for her to break up with me. I just couldn't stand to hurt a nice girl's feelings.

Having Covid

Last Autumn someone near me sneezed several times. I was wearing a mask. It was flu season, maybe they had the flu. I wasn't worried about it.

About ten days later something just hit me all of a sudden. I thought it must be the beginning of the flu.

It was simply zero energy and zero appetite. I would sleep for 9 hours and then even reading the news would cause me to fall asleep for four or five more hours. I could barely eat anything, but yet wasn't hungry. It was a great struggle to finish a granola bar.

My left eye was watering profusely, it was literally pouring water. But my right eye wasn't watering at all. 

I had no symptoms of Covid. I did not lose my sense of taste or smell. I could feel something in my lungs but never had any trouble breathing. It was just zero energy and zero appetite. All that I wanted to do was absolutely nothing. Even trying to do a little bit of reading would cause me to fall asleep.

This went on for three days. On the fourth day it seemed to be easing a little bit. I still felt completely without energy but was able to do some reading without falling asleep and had a little bit of food.

The most shocking day of all was the fifth day. I woke up, expecting to still be sick and still thinking that it was the flu. But my usual energy was back and all I could think about was food. It had left just as suddenly as it had arrived.

Of course now I know that Covid entered through my left eye.

What I think helped to get rid of Covid is the same thing that I do if I think I have been exposed to the flu. I drank water continuously. I drank more water in those four days than ever before in my life. It helped my body to wash out the virus.

Reminder About Other Blogs

 Just a reminder about the other blogs listed in the second posting from the top on this blog, "Other Blogs And Books".

What was to become this blog began in 2005. In 2009 I began a new system. This blog here was started as the main blog. All new postings would appear here. A new blog was also started for each different topic of the writing. Postings would periodically be moved from this main blog to the appropriate topical blog. All postings from before this new system in 2009 were moved to the appropriate topical blog.

After about five years I abandoned that system and now just leave all postings on this blog. But the postings that had been moved to the topical blogs are still there. This means that there is a lot of reading other than what is on this blog.

Links to each of the topical blogs are on "Other Blogs And Books", the second posting from the top.

The cosmology theory is on this blog in the compound posting, "The Theory Of Stationary Space". The posting that I use as a quick introduction to the theory is the posting on this blog, "In Cosmology Everything Just Fell Right Into Place", May 2019.

But that is actually what we could call version 2.0 of the theory. 1.0 is the cosmology blog. But it is the same theory and the two versions are complimentary.

In the same way my theory of information on this blog is the compound posting, "The Theory Of Complexity". But that could be called version 2.0 of the theory. Version 1.0 is the patterns and complexity blog.

The world and economics blog consists of separate postings and is not entirely a theory.

The geology blog contains the theory, "The Story Of Planet Earth", which explains every major feature of the earth's surface, both on land and the seafloor, but also has postings that are not part of the theory. There is a compound posting with my explanation of the Appalachians.

In the physics and astronomy blog the first part is about physics and the second about astronomy, but each article is separate from the others.

The progress blog is about new ideas.

The creation blog is why God must have created us.

On the meteorology and biology blog each article is separate from the others. 

Maybe 60% of the writing is on this blog. The rest are on those blogs.

The Non-News View Of The World

Remember what I am trying to do with these weekly visits to places around the world. We keep track of what is going on around the world by following the news. But, by it's very nature, news tends to be bad news. Even when there is good news, it is usually a reversal of previous bad news.

The news thus tends to give us a bias against other places and other countries. Stop and think for a minute, what would anyone think of your city or country if all they knew about it was what was in the news?

So what I am trying to do with these weekly visits is to present a view of a place as a virtual visit there. Some of it is about history, as well as what is going on there now, but I try to put the main focus on everyday life.

We have all got to find a way to share this earth. One way to help that along is to get around the inherent bias that comes with the news, and see each other just as human beings going about our daily lives.

The Source Of Ideas

Where do we get the new ideas that we come up with? Maybe the most important source is suggestion from our surroundings. Seeing logs rolling leads to the invention of the wheel. Seeing birds flying leads to the invention of aircraft.

But those are direct examples of coopting ideas from nature. There are more indirect ways of getting ideas from our surroundings, by using the patterns.

THE COMPASS RULER

I wonder if I might have subconsciously gotten the idea for the measurement tool, for use in building and construction, that I described in the posting on the Progress Blog "A Very Useful Tool" June 2009, from the chapati that a friend makes, pictured below served in a basket. Chapati is a flat, circular unleavened bread.

Following are photos of the prototype that I made of the measurement device. I named it the "Compass Ruler" because it consists of a magnetic compass in the center of a circular disk. The disk would probably have a circumference of a convenient unit, such as a meter or a yard.

Notice how closely it resembles a serving of chapati. I made the prototype of the tool by cutting a circular piece of plywood, with a jigsaw, so that it had a circumference of exactly one meter. Next I put the numbers, from zero to 360 degrees, around the edge and drew the lines from the numbers to the center. Then I bought an ordinary magnetic hiking compass, broke the casing off it, and glued it in the center of the plywood with the zero point of the compass aligned with the zero / 360 point on the dial.

To "zero" a compass means simply to rotate it until the needle, which is magnetic so that it always points to magnetic north, so that the needle points to the zero / 360, which is magnetic north, point on the dial. We could call this the "zero point" of the compass.

The outer numbers go around the circle from zero to 360 degrees. The inner numbers are only used when the Compass Ruler is used to measure either the curvature of a wall or the circumference of a large circular structure.

This simple device, which can be homemade, can accomplish an incredible number of measurement tasks that are otherwise difficult to do. I did extensive patent checking and no one had thought of it before. The closest thing to this is the surveyors compass, but that was a mounted stationary device while the Compass Ruler is used for measurement by putting the edge in contact with a structure such as a wall or fence.

This device is extremely useful. Every time I use it or think of it I realize there is more that I can do that I had not thought of before. The device operates on the same principle as a plumb, which uses a suspended weight to measure vertical angles with gravity on the plumb indicating straight vertical, except that this device uses the earth's magnetic field to measure lateral angles.

The edge of the device is placed against a structure, such as a wall or fence or sign, as shown below represented by the board, with the device rotated so that the needle is zeroed at the zero / 360 point, or magnetic north. Note the number on the outside edge, between zero and 360 degrees, that is immediately against the structure.

That same number is then placed against another structure, such as another wall. If the second wall is parallel to the first there will be a difference in angular reading on the compass of either zero or 180 degrees. If the two walls are perfectly perpendicular there will be a difference in reading of 90 degrees.

This is only the beginning of what this device can do and I wonder if it was chapati that planted the seed of the idea in my mind.

THE COSMOLOGY THEORY

In Gloucester UK, the nearest city to where I was born, on the side of the building where the store named Debenham's used to be located, the side of the building facing King's Square, there was a pattern of rows of four small square windows alternating with rows of three.

( Image photographed from Google Street View ).

When we eventually landed on the U.S. side of Niagara Falls I began attending 60th Street School. There was exactly the same pattern, rows of four small square windows alternating with rows of three. I have never seen this pattern anywhere else.
 

This resembles the way, in my cosmology theory "The Theory Of Stationary Space", first, how the matter in the universe began with a two-dimensional sheet of space that was within, but not contiguous with, the multi-dimensional background space although both blocs of space had formed in the same way, by the mutual induction of opposite electric charges. 

Second, how strings of matter formed of like electric charges, either negative or positive charges held together against their mutual repulsion by energy. The lines of windows display the same pattern as the lines of electric charges in the strings of matter.

Third, the alternating of three and four window rows may have been the source of the idea that while we live in three spatial dimensions my cosmology theory has another spatial dimension, a fourth dimension, that we perceive as time because the bundles of strings comprising our bodies and brains are aligned primarily in that dimension.

THE ALTERNATING ELECTRIC CHARGES IN THE COSMOLOGY THEORY

The following photo is of the poster that I had made of the ship that brought us across the ocean when I was a young boy, the Empress of England. I remember the Red and white checkered pattern on the ship's stack, seen at the center of the poster.

Maybe I subconsciously got the idea for the nature of space in my cosmology theory from the checkered pattern on this stack. Everything, in that theory, consists of negative and positive electric charges. The basic rule of electric charges is that opposite charges attract, while like charges repel.

Empty space, in my cosmology theory, is a perfectly alternating checkerboard pattern of the two opposite charges, in multiple dimensions. Matter is a concentration of like charges, held together against their mutual repulsion by energy.

JUXTAPOSED NAMES

I remember learning the word "Juxtapose" when I was age 16 in high school. Now I have finally found something to use it for.

Have you ever wondered about word combinations in names that do not seem to make sense? Consider, just for example, some of the names of pubs, and other places, in Britain.

There is the "Red Lion", except that lions are not usually red.

There is the "Crown and Anchor", but what do crowns and anchors have to do with each other? They go in opposite directions. A crown goes up, to the top of the head, while an anchor drops down, to the bottom of the sea.

The "Elephant and Castle" was originally the name of an inn. It has become the name of a section of London, as well as it's Underground station. But, as with crowns and anchors, elephants and castles usually do not have much to do with each other.

Part of the reason for such naming is so that the pub would have a name that could also be displayed as it's logo. But, as I see it, there is also another beneficial effect. It prompts the coming up with new ideas.

Seeing a word combination that apparently doesn't make sense helps to break us out of grooved-in thinking. A lot of new ideas are the putting together of things or their patterns that would otherwise not have been put together, and these juxtaposed names help to provide the mindset to move in that direction.

THE IDEA GENERATOR

The internet is the ultimate source of information. But it still has it's limits, it cannot think up new ideas for us, beyond what already exists. I once came up with an "idea generator", but today it could be done with an app.

Write down a lot of things that might be involved in generating ideas on slips of paper, and put the slips in a jar. Every day take out four slips, although it could be a number other than four, and write down the four things that are on the slips, then put the slips back in the jar.

The four things that you take out of the jar might be "top", "sheet", "metal" and, "diamond". During the day run those four things through your mind and see if you can think of some new process or device that will incorporate the four things.

By the end of the day what you probably will have come up with is nothing. But you will be getting yourself in the mindset to come up with new ideas. Try it again, with four different words, the next day. You might come up with a new idea, an invention or process, involving words that had been chosen on a previous day.

READING ABOUT OTHER IDEAS

One of the most effective ways to get into the mindset for coming up with new ideas is to read about other new ideas. It not only brings about the mindset, it might also offer parts of some ideas. That is why I wrote the Progress Blog.

Here is a link to the posting, "A Very Useful Tool", on the Progress Blog:

www.markmeekprogress.blogspot.com/2009/06/very-useful-tool.html?m=0 

Here is a link to the entire Progress Blog:

www.markmeekprogress.blogspot.com/?m=0