ALIEN WATER No19, Edit B

Studio Still Life Photography.

Title: “ALIEN WATER No19, Edit B”.

Year (No.19, Edit B): 2021.
———
Series: Studio Still Life Photography.
Series Years: 1994 – Present (On-Going).
—————

☆ You can buy Fine Art Studio Still Life Photography Series Prints at this Link @Imagekind:
https://www.imagekind.com/artists/nawfalnur/STUDIO-STILL-LIFE-PHOTOGRAPHY/fine-art-prints
—————

Tags:
Yellow, StudioStillLife, Tabletop, Photography, Product, NawfalJohnson, FineArt, #Imagekind, water, ABSTRACT, splash,

MENTAL NOTE #110, MY 800TH BLOG POST AT NAWFALNUR.WORDPRESS!

MENTAL NOTE #110, MY 800TH BLOG POST AT NAWFALNUR.WORDPRESS.COM/ !

I was trying to remember what year I started my NawfalNur.WordPress.com/ blog: This is my second oldest blog, and my recently ‘retired’ blog, Smokephotographist.WordPress.com/ , is my oldest blog — I started exhibiting my Fine Art Photography, and writing and publishing on the subjects of PHOTOGRAPHY, Art, and related information, at Smokephotographist.WordPress.com/ , in 2005. Thus, my guess, without purposefully looking it up, is that NawfalNur.WordPress.com/ was founded in 2007. Therefore, I think this blog is about 13, or thereabouts, years old.

BY THE WAY, WORDPRESS was founded in May 2003, so I’ve been blogging (since April 2005) for ALMOST as long as WORDPRESS has been around. I’m an ‘OldTimer’!

I usually publish and exhibit my Fine Art Photography here. HOWEVER …

This year, I started an ongoing ‘Philosophical’ (sort of) series, titled “MENTAL NOTES”, and actually I have many more than 110 MENTAL NOTEs: For some odd, mental reason, I got MAJORLY STUCK at MENTAL NOTE #31! FOR SEVERAL WEEKS, I was publishing MENTAL NOTES at #31, so I had MENTAL NOTEs numbering, #31.1, 31.2 … MENTAL NOTE #31.9736482, LOL!, UNTIL I felt one of my new MENTAL NOTEs seemed like a #32.

Therefore, I have no idea of the exact number of MENTAL NOTEs published so far, but I would guess somewhere between 125 to 145 … probably.

I could have dedicated a New Blog to my MENTAL NOTES Series; however, starting a new blog is not the best way to get a lot of people to see content you want them to see. It is a slow process to gain followers at a new blog!

After retiring Smokephotographist.WordPress.com/ , I asked people to Goto my Newest Art Photography Blog, http://TheSmokephotographist.WordPress.com/ and support me over there … it was a Simple click of the button / Link, to goto my new Blog and Hit Subscribe!

It may take a total of 20 Seconds to Support me at my new Art Photography Blog … BUT I WAS A BIT DISAPPOINTED that ONLY A HANDFUL of my current subscribers took the small amount of time, and small effort, to Subscribe and Support me at my New Blog, TheSmokephotographist.WordPress.com/ . I think you too, would be slightly disappointed, don’t you think, if you had such low results from a simple request for help.

Therefore, that showed me that even when I asked for help from present subscribers at my old blog, to support me at my NEW Blog, ( http://TheSmokephotographist.WordPress.com/ ) , it was like pulling teeth to get people to help me out with that small request. NEVERTHELESS, I was Very-VERY Happy with the people who took the effort to show their support for me.

If you start a new blog, please let me know, because I will show my support,

… as long as your new blog is not something on the EXTREME FRINGE of subject matter … or it is a blog focusing on a philosophy that I ethically and morally cannot support — but I don’t think anyone here who presently subscribes to my blogs is into EXTREMELY fringe and majorly controversial subjects that I am vehemently against.

Therefore, starting a new blog is not easy, even if you have a reasonable following at other blogs you publish.

If you want to start a new subject series, it is basically more efficient to work it into your present blog(s), in my opinion. That is what I did with my MENTAL NOTEs SERIES — I just made it a regular subject at my established blog. You may find that useful information for your own blog, if you want to start writing on a new topic, on a regular basis.

Anyway, that’s about all I want to write about in this Blog Post Number 800, and in contemplating life in the Blogosphere, in MENTAL NOTE #110.

MENTAL NOTE #85, SOMETIMES, THINKING ABOUT THE CONFIGURATION OF THE UNIVERSE, GIVES ME A HEADACHE …

MENTAL NOTE #85: SOMETIMES, I GET A HEADACHE WHEN THINKING ABOUT THE UNIVERSE.

“The hypersphere is expanding from a point, like a four-dimensional balloon being inflated, creating in every instant more space in the universe. Sometime after the expansion begins, galaxies condense and are carried outward on the surface of the hypersphere. There are astronomers in each galaxy, and the light they see is also trapped on the curved surface of the hypersphere. As the sphere expands, an astronomer in any galaxy will think all the other galaxies are running away from him. There are no privileged reference frames.* The farther away the galaxy, the faster its recession. The galaxies are embedded in, attached to space, and the fabric of space is expanding. And to the question, Where in the present universe did the Big Bang occur? the answer is clearly, everywhere.”

Sagan, C. (2014). The demon-haunted world: Science as a candle in the dark. New York: Ballantine Books.

AND THEN, because AstroPhysicists have nothing better to do … Dahhhh … they come up with a MULTIVERSE Theory, which not only tends to cause normal Cosmology enthusiasts to get migraines, but also bleeding profusely from the nose. Nevertheless, the pain is worth it!

“This picture of the universe, or multiverse, as it is called, explains the long-standing mystery of why the constants of nature appear to be fine-tuned for the emergence of life. The reason is that intelligent observers exist only in those rare bubbles in which, by pure chance, the constants happen to be just right for life to evolve. The rest of the multiverse remains barren, but no one is there to complain about that.

Some of my physicist colleagues find the multiverse theory alarming. Any theory in physics stands or falls depending on whether its predictions agree with the data. But how can we verify the existence of other bubble universes? Paul Steinhardt and George Ellis have argued, for example, that the multiverse theory is unscientific, because it cannot be tested, even in principle.

Surprisingly, observational tests of the multiverse picture may in fact be possible. Anthony Aguirre, Matt Johnson, Matt Kleban and others have pointed out that a collision of our expanding bubble with another bubble in the multiverse would produce an imprint in the cosmic background radiation—a round spot of higher or lower radiation intensity. A detection of such a spot with the predicted intensity profile would provide direct evidence for the existence of other bubble universes. The search is now on, but unfortunately there is no guarantee that a bubble collision has occurred within our cosmic horizon.

There is also another approach that one can follow. The idea is to use our theoretical model of the multiverse to predict the constants of nature that we can expect to measure in our local region. If the constants vary from one bubble universe to another, their local values cannot be predicted with certainty, but we can still make statistical predictions. We can derive from the theory what values of the constants are most likely to be measured by a typical observer in the multiverse. Assuming that we are typical—the assumption that I called the principle of mediocrity—we can then predict the likely values of the constants in our bubble.

This strategy has been applied to the energy density of the vacuum, also known as “dark energy”. Steven Weinberg has noted that in regions where dark energy is large, it causes the universe to expand very fast, preventing mater from clumping into galaxies and stars. Observers are not likely to evolve in such regions. Calculations showed that most galaxies (and therefore most observers) are in regions where the dark energy is about the same as the density of matter at the epoch of galaxy formation. The prediction is therefore that a similar value should be observed in our part of the universe.” (The arguments for a Multiverse go on further in this particular paper, and if you want to know more, click on the Scientific American link:

Source: Vilenkin, A. (2011, July 19). The Case for Parallel Universes. Retrieved September 15, 2020, from https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/multiverse-the-case-for-parallel-universe/

MENTAL NOTE #70, MY FAVOURITE PHYSICS LAW! What’s Yours?

MENTAL NOTE #70:  MY FAVOURITE PHYSICS LAW — There’s too many to choose from.  HOWEVER, IF, I had to pick only one, it would be THE LAW OF CONSERVATIVE OF ANGULAR MOMENTUM, without a doubt!

Here’s a good example of what it explains in nature:

Conservation of Angular Momentum: An ice skater is spinning on the tip of her skate with her arms extended. Her angular momentum is conserved because the net torque on her is negligibly small. In the next image (not shown here), her rate of spin increases greatly when she pulls in her arms, decreasing her moment of inertia. The work she does to pull in her arms results in an increase in rotational kinetic energy.”

(Source: lumen boundless Physics website).