<object id="4BcA"><legend id="4BcA"><bdo id="4BcA"></bdo></legend></object>
<rt id="4BcA"></rt>
<ruby id="4BcA"><optgroup id="4BcA"></optgroup></ruby>

<ruby id="4BcA"><optgroup id="4BcA"></optgroup></ruby>
<cite id="4BcA"></cite>
<strong id="4BcA"></strong>
  • <cite id="4BcA"></cite>

      <rt id="4BcA"></rt>
      <rt id="4BcA"><progress id="4BcA"><acronym id="4BcA"></acronym></progress></rt>
      1. <cite id="4BcA"></cite>
        Um the carbon tax is happening it will be unseen or on the table, you choose...

        This site  The Web 

        My other site at this time:  http://www.carbon-tax.net/ 
        Republished under different circumstances:  November 28 2018 or otherwise know as:  112818.
        You figure it out.
        Ken Hausle is my name.  As well as:  Buffalo_Ken.  That is who I am. 


        (Drumrolls Please - probably for the last time ever, this site is republished - I think I did it yesterday, but todays date is:  72918)  

        Please be aware - all of the links on this site may no longer work....this site has a history you must know.

        But it is republished for the time being, and here it is.  Take it for what you will.

        December 3, 2010.

        OK - I admit it this site is a tad unorthodox when it comes to what I have to say about numbers (and shapes if you can make the connection) --- but I stand by the language I use here, and the environmental statements are solid as a rock.  I know my environmental law, but more important than that, I have a good sense of the big-picture.  I may go crazy one day and I probably already have gone crazy on several occasions, but they were temporary, and through it all I held onto my good intent.  That I will take to my grave!  So there you have it.  This site is published again and even if it seems "out there", I'm willing to risk it and share what I have been thinking  12911.  By the way numbers and shapes and language go hand-n-hand-n-hand, and I think we all ought study bismuth a bit more.......83 is a great number if there ever was one.  Bismuth is NOT radioactive.  It is stable and it is Prime!

        Okey-Dokey(holdonamoment....)---dukey.  Okey-dokey-dukie, today I'm feeling friendly, so I've decided it is time for a change.  Today is April 14 2011.  41411.  Time to remove some content that is now superfulous.  I'll be back if I can and the good news is that I am typing this from my new home in Virginia.  Today (as well as yesterday) I am a resident of both a state and a commonwealth.  What U think bout that?


        ....and it sort of goes this way with me.  If I can't talk, why should I participate?

        So, I have other places where I can talk and that is what I will do.  I don't want to be a 2nd tier citizen and nor do I want to be left behind.  I refuse.

        Anyhow, over the last few years I have publically posted so many messages on the internet, but this public posting is going to greatly diminish going forward because I will be focussing more of my energy and effort on my own sites that I have registered.  This is probably for the best.

        Anyhow, the rest of what is here at this site is all that really matters to me just now.....bye byes can be so hard sometimes and I will miss the interaction with some of my "internet friends", but the best friend is one you can actually touch with your two hands.....it is good to have good friends.

        So, in keeping with what I said above, today (11310) (note - there is a 1 13 10 and a 11 3 10 - which is which - well, should I tell?  My guess is that if you want to use an 11' in a 10-based system, then it needs some sort of distinction - by the way, nothing, not even nothing, is perfect, but I got my system - I just haven't flushed it all yet - get my drift - 1 29 11 is the day today - give me about 17 more years and my theories will come to fruition - I'll take that to my grave as well), I am gonna do a few edits here....  By the way, I live in Charlotte, NC (as ought be most evident) - you can find my address.  It is on the Internet.  So much is on the Internet that so much is noW so obvious.  And just to elaborate:  WE KNOW!




        Here is another comment from a public hearing held in Statesville, NC on January 22, 2009 - oh, what a tragic travesty this is becoming.....will dukie ever learn?  I reckon yes, but it remains to be seen if it will be "healthy learning" or learning the hard way; and, as each day goes by with continued insistance by the few without consideration for remedy, the hard way of learning increases in probability.  This seems so evident to me - do you agree?

        Comments submitted by a NC Citizen

        Public Hearing – Duke Cliffside Permit Amendment

        Statesville, NC – January 22, 2009


        Good Evening.  My name is ("buffalo_ken" - ha, ha) and I live in Charlotte, NC.  Except for one year after college when I worked at two chemical plants, I’ve lived in NC since 1978.  I have a chemical engineering degree from NC State and a Masters in Public Health (Environmental Management Department) from UNC-Chapel Hill.  After I graduated from Chapel Hill, I worked for 16 years as an environmental consultant specializing in air quality with the last 10 years spent running my own one-man company.  I am currently not doing this work anymore, but I’ve been closely following the air permitting process for the Duke Cliffside facility. 


        Because this public hearing is specifically for the proposed amendment to the air quality permit that has already been issued for the Duke Cliffside conventional coal-fired power plant construction, I will focus my comments on this.  However, just for the record, I did submit comments to the original proposed air permit in opposition and I have also recently submitted comments regarding NCDENR’s proposal to exempt combustion-related toxic pollutant air emissions from the NC Air Toxics rule. 


        The amended permit proposes a one-time stack test as an option for showing compliance.  Based on my experience, a one-time stack test will not assure ongoing compliance nor will quarterly testing be sufficient.


        Comment 1 – Proposed Monitoring is Woefully Inadequate for the Following Reasons:

        a)     As anyone who has worked at a plant knows (I’ve been to many), operations vary from day-to-day.  Sometimes considerably.  A one-time test cannot reflect this.

        b)     Chlorine and fluorine levels (plus other constituent) levels in coal vary.  A single stack test will not properly account for this.

        c)     As a general "good permitting" practice, monitoring requirements need to become increasingly stringent as limits are approached.  Guidance developed by EPA during development of the Compliance Assurance Monitoring Rule seriously suggest that for the Cliffside situation, which involves complicated control equipment, a single one-time test (and even possible quarterly tests) does not satisfy this established good permitting practice. 


        Comment 2 – Proposed Limit Fails to Require Duke to Account for Other HAP Emissions that Must be Considered

        Beside emissions from the stack there are considerable emissions from a variety of other supporting ancillary operations (particularly “dusting-type” emissions).  To the best of my knowledge, there is vast legal precedent that requires these emissions to be accounted for.  The permit condition fails miserably in this regard, because it ignores these emissions altogether as if they weren’t even happening.


        In conclusion, I think the amended permit as proposed should not be issued.  Thank you for the opportunity to speak here publicly.

        Building an effective web site can make a huge difference in increasing responsiveness. I agree.  

        Services include:

        • (Yet to be defined....please check back later, but for now read below for a bit of detail regarding some of my sentiment as well as a "molecular theory" that I'm working on that is much simpler and I think makes more sense than what is being taught nowadays about very small itty bitty interactions between fundamental entities....).

        • buffalo_ken - edit, 82516 (some great numbers there) - this is a link that remains:  http://www.peoplesproclamation.net/ (you may need to cut and paste that.....sorry) --- damm, I seriously wonder if anyone is noticing anything - probably not, but there is always a chance!.  The whole neutron thing is kind of out there and I'm still studying.  Still, I honestly think it really ought be much simpler that what we have now with respect to quantum physics (SMALL stuff U NO?) - Peace again, Ken Hausle, August 25, 2016 - a nice day!

          I was at a meeting not too long ago and I heard some “recent-gnomish-banking-loving-fella” talk about “all the possibilities” to create financial instruments associated with “CO2-trading” (which by the way is already happening).

          Anyhow, on my way out after this presentation, I scowled and scoffed and said “why would we expect these fools” who got us in this mess that we are now in (in the first place) to somehow solve it with more of the same type of “fiscal-schemery” shenanigans.

          I said it won’t happen that way…..these gnomes are on the way out. Seriously. Individually as I sense it. In America, some of us might have been fooled, but not all of us.

          Anyhow, I think there should be a “tax” on the user and on the maker. The tax should reflect the amount of CO2 generated by the product, and the amount of CO2 to get the product on the shelf, respectively. The tax revenues should be used to figure out better alternatives.

          This will make it evident where the inefficiencies lie. I already know the inefficiencies associated with the current “CO2-tax” that we are all subject to, and for which we have been subject for some time now. It is evident.


          It is time for something better.

          Does this make any sense to U?


        • buffalo_ken

          My suspicion is that the amount of CO2 to make and get a product out of the ground and into the store shelf (or tank or whatever) often greatly exceeds the amount of CO2 generated by the product.

          This speaks directly regarding the inefficiencies.

          We could fix it quick!

          Grow some trees why don’t you…..

          By the way, a fews years back I submitted an entry into the $25 million contest. Hadn’t heard much about that of late.

          Grom some trees why don’t ya – its good banking. Good reserves if you know what I mean, and a tree can be grown within just a single human lifetime.


        A table...
        Lets put it ALL on the table
        Lets talk.
        Lets come up with a plan to work together
        It can be done..

        Join Our Mailing List

        By joining our mailing list, you will be the first to know about:

        • Breaking news
        • Helpful tips
        • Who knows what else....
        To join, type your name and email address below and then click the Go button:

        I'm not sure any of this will work just yet, but I'm going to get this site going if I can...:

        The picture below and
        the picture above encompass the other pictures above - u c?

        this just keeps on getting more and more "fun" - a transfer is transpiring - i sense it.  Regardless....here is another message:

        Update 1 (1/30/08) - Today I heard that Duke has recieved their permit.  NCDENR has looked through the comments and made their decision.

        Public Hearing on Duke Energy’s Proposed New Cliffside, NC Coal-Fired Boiler September 18, 2007 - Comments for Submittal

        Update 2 (9/09/08) - (Its actually Update 3 now - 112316 - time to edit out some text -- what is done is done.  Its the future I mainly care about, but of course, if we can't learn from past mistakes, then how can we learn at all?).


        In conclusion I want to go on record as adamantly opposing construction of a new conventional coal-fired power plant in Cliffside, NC or anywhere else for that matter. It is time for some new and creative ideas focused on clean and decentralized power generation.

        Thank-you for giving me an opportunity to express these views.


        Buffalo Ken, PE

        Charlotte, NC

        (Edit, 112316 - I'd like to think this is the most important part of this site and much of the other stuff is a reflection of some real-world consideration that is always happening.  This part though is really just about shape imagination as well as frustration with the science of small which seems to be way more complicated than it should be or needs to be.  It is so complicated, that there is no way to grasp the concepts without a freaking life-time studying quantum mechanics --- makes me think it has almost turned into its own religion that only a few are "qualified" to grasp.  Something bout that just don't seem "right" to me.  What I talk about below is really simple, easily envisioned, and sensible.  That in and of itself puts it a step above). 


        I think I have just improved my theory regarding the non-existance of neutrons.

        I've figured out A way to imagine helium's atomic shape as well as Beryllium's.

        1. Helium has two almost totally equal "helium protons" in the "core area" and the 2 of them rotate around each other in constant motion (if they were exactly the same in the beginning there probably could never have been any motion, but it doesn't really matter). They are never exactly the same because they "swap" a bit of material with each other all the time. Swapping and rotating in a cozy core area. Electrons come and "join the party" so to speak to balance off the positive core area, or of course, the electrons may have already been there just waiting for some protons to show up.
        postscript:  OK, so it tis a dreary rainy early afternoon in Charlotte, NC on a mild February day (the 22nd) in the 10th year......and I have been thinking about "noble" elements on the Periodic Table.  The first two noble ones (so to speak).  Helium and Neon.  Now, lets please consider some number relationships.  Helium is #2.  Take the number 2 and multiply it by itself 3 times and you get 8.  2 + 8 = 10.  Ergo, 2 and 10 are "noble" (in a way) because they resist interaction in most instances especially over time.  But, you can't get to 10 without 3, and this is more than just about numbers.  Think shapes (or perhaps "forms") if you will.  Regardless, the shape of 8 speaks to forever, but at the same time, 8 enables 9.  Without 9, we would have no 10, but it only took two 3's to get to 9.  Know what I'm getting at here?  Anyhow, looks like the sun is starting to appear so maybe the afternoon is not so dreary afterall.  It is now 12:45 pm.

        2. Beryllium has its own unique protons but I put forth that in its most stable configuration there is usually a "playoff" between a group of 3 plus one other that moves much more than the 3 do individually. Can you visualize this?  112316 I'll try to expound - So in other words, the 3 would usually be close together all wobbling slightly and the 4th would be independently traveling amongst the 3 but part of the overall group.  At certain moments "members" of the 3 would instantaneously change, such that over any appreciable amount of time there really wouldn't be any individual distinction amongst the 4 as a whole.
        3. I'll get to lithium later.  Edit, today is November 26th, 2009 - (do you doubt me - ?).  I have just explained lithium (yesterday), but the explanation was elsewhere.  (following text deleted and edited on 112316).  It has to do with chance, and I don't play with chance.  Do you?  Some lessons are hard and some are soft.  Just like science.  Quantum physics by the way is so SOFT..........um, don't you just want to imagine it?  So ends my one and only one discussion regarding lithium, unless of course, you come to my place and ask me face-to-face.  Then we can talk again.  Simple - don't you think?  Maybe not occum's razor simple, but just plum simple.  Simple is as simple does and lithium is so simple, almost too simple to try to describe, but I have nonetheless because I dare to share, and I proclaim: "no harmful intent".  Can you do better?
        postscript:  my site on lithium:  http://co2-trading.info/index.html   (112316 - sadly the aforementioned site is no longer on the internet....I've got to find my hard copy.......))I'm still thinking about lithium....still thinking, but I know this, it is number 3 on the table, and that is NOT trivial - lithium enables transition to so many of the heavier elements......and I'll say this as well because I have already said it elsewhere, but all of the "radiocative" elements are "suspect" in my book.....they don't last.  I am particularly interested in why #43 Technetium is the first radioactive element to make it on the table.....hmmmmmm ...
        I found part of the hard copy....here it is.....I'm gonna put this inside a boundary of some 3's.  It is about lithium.

        Please, let me acknowledge upfront how wonderful I think imagination is.  We wouldn't be here without it.  I have imagination and so do you.  We all do, and I think it (this) is great.  I think it is part of what makes us all individuals and gives each of us integrity.  But, I also think imagination in us "human-folk" is both individual as well as collective, because we are "social animals" - are we not?  Thus, imagination affects the future both individually and collectively, and in this way, imagination can result in both positive or negative consequences depending on what ideas "take hold".  The future is full of uncertainty, but if we imagine peacefully and with reverence, then I think this uncertainty can be navigated successfully. 

        I want to share ideas I have with others joyfully so that I can learn from others and perhaps others can learn from me.  I don't want to be alone - especially in my thoughts.  I don't think anyone does.  But, I'll admit, sometimes when I contemplate the "here and now" I feel down about it all, and a sadness enters my heart.  Other times, I feel exuberant, and this feels good, although too much of either is not healthy, and I've learned to strive for balance, but it is an ongoing personal effort.  I've made mistakes in this regard, but I think that I am improving. 

        With that said, let me also say that this site started out as a place to discuss "lithium" (Atomic Number 3 on the "Great Periodic Table" - thanks Mendeleev), but as often happens, the site has turned into something a bit different than what I first imagined.  I put forth though that it remains a discussion about "lithium" even if it is a subtle and perhaps circuitous one, and I also put forth that this discussion is certainly open for debate and is most definitely not intended to be harmful in any way, shape, form, or fashion.  Its harmless basically, but it is also helpful (at least it is for me).  What could be better than that?  Whether you peruse this site is totally up to you.  It is your choice.  Free will if you will.  Could anything be better than that I ask again? 

        Well, enough of this little "intro", and as I say in so many other places, let me say again:  Peace from me to you and my family to your family.  I pray for peace even as I try to better understand so many things including: lithium, the #3 (literally), and that incredible awesome Periodic Table that is so real it merits deep study in my mind.  In contrast, some things ("concepts") such as "black holes", (which are discussed below) are almost too imaginary, and I think we should put these sort of things on the "back burner" for later study when we are more prepared because we need to better comprehend that which we can directly sense such as the elements on the Periodic Table that we can literally touch, smell, taste, feel, and even hear sometimes.  Then we will have a more informed imagination and won't get ahead of ourselves with certain ideas that are just too full of uncertainty.  Know what I mean?  I hope so because it just seems sensible to me, and that is perhaps the main idea of this site, and it turns out lithium and the number 3 are what got me going down this "thought pathway".  Anyhow, see below if you want to read more on this sentiment.  Peace.

        Above "Intro" as typed on this day January 8, 2010 (with an edit on 11010). 

        Announcement that stems from the fact that I now better understand black holes even moreso than discussed below (123110):  ........I will tell you this - it has to do with trying to approach 0 - the reality is that it simply cannot be done.  Not anymore.

        so on this day, 112316, I will say there is a bunch more and I have it all saved, but for now, I've re-published enough.  Happy Thanksgiving.  I'm thankful and I'm happy that I'm still able to share my ideas.... 


        (OK - I'm having fun, so lets see how far I can go with this.....below is more from my original site on lithium - Today, by the way, is many years from when I originally came up with this text.  Today is 12'316.  Got it?  Without further ado.....nor with any editing which I'll do later...it is now a bit later and so I will do just a minor edit 12'316 2:11 EST PM

        OK - I will now simply and succintly explain why "black holes" (per the current physics nomenclature) do NOT exist. Here goes: Funnels all lead to somewhere else otherwise they would not be a funnel, but rather they would be a "cup". Neither a funnel nor a cup are a black hole, and therefore, black holes do not exist..... Edit: "1810" - 1/8/10 - OK, OK, I admit, this (the last sentance above) is not definitive, but what follows in red is and the concept I was attempting to get across is the important difference between that which is of the "imagination" - such as black holes - versus that which can be directly sensed such as cups and funnels - so just to drag this out some more: I suppose black holes exist in imaginary mathamatics, but we don't really know if a black hole behaves like a funnel or a cup or maybe a bit of both, and honestly what difference does this make to the here and now because it is all speculation, and there has simply been too much of that of late. Speculation is NOT proof and even worse, if unchallenged, it tends to "grow upon itself" leading to even more "vested error" that big egos have a hard time recognizing and acknowledging. Moreover, if something cannot be clearly defined because of too much uncertainty, can it even be understood at all? Might such speculation actually cause unforseen and dangerous consequences just like what happens when we "play" around with "zero" and "infinity" without really understanding our own inherent limitations? I think so, and I also think this sort of thing has been running ludicrously rampant of late and it makes it so hard to differentiate "truth" from fiction, and this accelerates, entrenches, and only gets worse the longer it goes on. It takes on a life of its own, yet it offers nothing in return, and in reality it is nothing but unchallenged fiction that ultimately has no merit. There is too much mud in the water and mountain tops are being blown away so that old life (coal) can be burned. This is foolish and irreverent and I hope that we come to our senses soon because the scales are in the balance - don't you sense this? I do and I think it is high time for some "clear down-to-earth" thinking and focus - and with that typed, let me get back to the older text....(in red). .....They are imaginary mathamatics and that is all they are. Funnels and cups do exist and I think I am now going to have my evening meal and cups will likely be involved and I suspect funnels as well. Ain't life grand? As posted here on this day in the month of December of the 28th day in the 9th year of the 2nd Millennia (per present day conventional calendar sensibilities - know what I mean?). Have you seen a black hole? Have you smelled one? Have you been near one? What happened to you if so? If not, then you have no idea other than your imaginary mathamatical foolishness based on Calculus which we should all know is FLAWED at the edges...as is just about everything else in a way. Still, I love a good funnel and cups are awesome. OK, time to choose a color for the above text....I chose RED for the above text, because I'm tired of harmful imagination - sometimes for the original "imaginator", it (their imagination) may seem innocuous (especially if they think, I am just trying to be a "scientist" - can anyone say "quantum physicist"?), but the more detached it is from physical reality, the more likely are the "unexpected consequences" such as an irreverence for life in general by a few who think they are capable of "creating reality" for everyone else for the sake of their own ego-based, selfish, worldly, materialistic "benefit" - talk about sick.....I'm tired of it, and I'm not the only one and I can PROVE this. Can we not do better with our enlightened individual and collective consciousness? I think so, but I know this also: Time is of the essence and the clock is ticking.   HELPFUL HINTS are always welcome  But with that said, harmful intent is NOT desired and if you send it my way be prepared for me to send some justified retribution back at ya!  I proclaim no harmful intent, so please don't misinterpret me, but if you doubt my proclamation, then I say to you: Prove your doubt without harm. A short interlude on this day (it ain't may), sometime in April near the last portion of the month in the year of 10. Anyhow, here is the word of the day: PAPRIKA - how you like them apples? You can do whatever you want to, but you do know that there are always consequences don't you? You are alive aren't you? You are not the only one, and I can prove it. come to my place if you are interested and at this site, information will be shared. OK - I have decided to raise this up a notch because I can although I will admit, I wasn't sure where to put this....just now it is on a piece of paper. Hm. Here goes (I decided to put it here for now for the sake of "staying on topic"): Now think about this. Black holes are like an opportunity - especially if you are merely a black hole spectator - keeping your distance but observing nonetheless. Well then it could be most interesting (or should I say "fascinating"?) to watch as something else approached the black well, I mean hole. Oh well, nothing to do but sit back and watch to sense "what must happen"..... Could be a good learning opportunity especially since you know there is nothing you can do to help in this scenario. My advice would be this Keep you distance from black holes! _____________________________________________________ As typed in: 11810 - 8:52, then 8:55, then 9:00 am EST (starting with above greenish text 'OK.....' that I won't edit again....i hope) _____________________________________________________ 1 2 3 table NOW i have explained "lithium"......loop back if you can So if you don't think that explained lithium, then it is not my fault. I just explained it as best I could at the time I tried. More than likely a better explanation is forthcoming, and in fact, I am woking on it as I type this. Meanwhile, I will be working on some other things...........including the so-called Times New Roman.. An addendum to the upfront statement in this column: 1. I love staring into space as much as the next physicist fella or lady. 2. There is nothing wrong with staring into space - we can learn much this way. 3. As long as we understand our own limits ---- particularly limits of the imagination - particularly mathamatical imagination. 4. Because as I've stated elsewhere - if you go too (2 two to) far forward, then imagination is FULL of uncertainty and eventually approaches the limit of "no probability" whereas, going backwards ain't nothing but science in action. Science enables PROOF. ps - I don't believe the big bang happened either, but at least I know this - YOU CAN NEVER PROVE THE BEGINNING! Time - you can't go back and you can't go forward excepting perhaps just an itty bit in imagination. Collective imagination (i.e. ideas that resonate) can go forward the most. Taken to its logical extreme individual thought is a DEAD end road for us all. If it don't resonante, then who gives a flip bout it? Not I. So anyhow, it can be fun to think about "black holes" and such, but it is better to just recognize a cup as a cup and a funnel for what it is. A funnel is a way to move something from one place to another with ease. Funnels are good, you can hold em, touch em, and they work well for what they are "designed" to do - that is assuming they are well built. A cup is worthless (or at least it ain't a cup anymore) if it has a hole - especially a hole near the bottom. Who needs a leaky cup? Might as well make the leak bigger and turn it into a funnel, but even then if it started out as a cup, it will probably never amount to much of a funnel. Simple really if you understand shapes and such. Happy New Years to All - 2010 is gonna be a GOOD year. I feel it. (the above "starting with the red text" was written on this day December 29, 2009 as an addendum to the text at the beginning of this column). 3 is so simple it is beautiful in this way....4 is even better and sometimes I think 5 is the best, but I know 6 exists as does 7 and of course 8 is 2 sweet being that it is 2 raised to the power of 3. Hm. 8 makes me hungry for some PINK! (and now I have better explained lithium)! I'm so fond of pink --- I love to eat it up. Guess what? - this site has been renewed for 9 additional years until sometime in 2019, and so until then, as long as I am alive, you are gonna have to suffer through reading what I have to type! What do you think of this. I don't know about you but I am excited about this. Now a long time ago in my "internet life" I typed some things on many sites, and when I typed it, I meant it. Just as I mean it now as I type this. See you again in 2019 and inbetween I hope...... - "2012" is just a big joke by a bunch a of seemingly mean ladies (mostly bitter old women) who have no clue (in my mind)....about what it means to love somebody else. Know what I mean as I whistle in the wind? Do you? If so, good, please stay in touch cause we need touch. Don't you think so? If not, why are we here in the first place?

        (Wow, I am sure that is hard to read without the formatting that it previously had...."sorry"....but you might be able to gleam something from it, and I'll be back later if I can) 


        4. I'd surmise that Boron entails 5 well-positioned "boron protons". A nice simple configuration.

        5. Please note - per this "small model", not all protons are the same and neutrons don't even need to exist.  (112316 - KEY Concept if this theory has any validity - NOT all protons are the SAME! - what matters from a periodic table standpoint is HOW many protons are together in total and that forms the chemical into which they manifest)
        6.  I could discuss carbon and I will because for heaven's sake this site in named http://u6dnph.fw8wz9rs.tw/ (loop back!)
        Edit:  August 28, 2009 - I have a poker game that I am setting up for tonight so I need to be brief - I think 6 creates shapes that are so tough there is no changing these shapes.  Thanks goodness for 6 because without it we would never have 7.  And of course, without 5, six would not exist.  There is an order to all of this - don't you think?
        7.  OK, we must be up to #7 now, and for Nitrogen (out of respect for the fog around my house this morning), for now, I will say one thing and one thing only:  "electron cloud" - talk about volume, and then you get gases (excepting of course those first two, who act like gases most of the time, but have most interesting behavior when the pressure is on (or/and or even and/or if the temperature is chilllllllllly - oh so cold - this potentially sepurfulous edit was added at 1:03 pm on 22210 - ha!).  OK, after N, comes oxygen, and I am all about that!  Oxygen is critical for any compost bin.  No doubt in that, at least here, on Planet Earth where we all reside.  I mean think about it........how can you measure back to some "big bang" using materials and elements created after the supposed big bang happened in the first place?  No way.  Can't be done.  So please, get over yourselves.  After you find the next "big mystery" particle or entity, what will be the next big mystery?  What a waste this Switzerland swirling high-energy wasting foolishness is.  Get some common sense would be my advice to those quantum physicist working there who think they know something about nothing!  Get a clue and for old-times sake:  "Get a Grip" .  Love is the bottom LINE.  Oh, and lastly for this RANT, let me be the first to say that I do not know anything about nothing.  Not a thing.  I know nothing about nothing nor will I ever know anything about nothing.  What is there to know anyhow?  Nothing?  I'm not interested.  Nothing is nothing but bad imagination in the minds of a few who have no idea about what it means to be mutual.  Thank goodness there are only a few of them left.....
        Oh let me put a "date" on this:  (M-2, Year 9, December 14, a Monday, 9:42 am (NOW 9:45 or so), Eastern Standard Time (US))...or there-abouts.  Anyhow, what I discussed above dealt with an important question in my mind as to why some elements tend to be solid and why others tend to be gases, and any good model ought be able to account for this known scientific fact!  I think my model does already, but if you give me about 20 years, then I suspect it will.  After that, I'll be happy to discuss this in detail with others, and maybe even before if you want to come to my place, but let me please say, I prefer guests who arrive with an invitation, and as for quests, I'll take them if I am in the mood.  If not, then my response will likely be accordingly!  And one last thing, Fluorine (#9) is most reactive, I should know - I've been around it for a long time.  Adious Amigos!
        Note:  Text color changed 10:03 am, same day as referenced just above.......12'149......am time.....if you want to go out a few decimal places, but I didn't feel the need for such goofy precision that is really only imaginary!

        ps - more will be forthcoming (I hope!).
        here is something else:  a link!
        www.kjh-es.com another site of mine.....links to others.
        loop back if you can, loop around if that is better, just be considerate of your neighbor - don't you think so...
        ,,,,so tell me this if you know anything....why is technetium #43 and do you think it is a coincidence that if you doubt (I mean "double") 43 you get into some serious radioactive activity?  Well let me tell you, it is not a coincidence, and this is why shapes matter, and my little theory here is better than what is being considered just now, and that is why you ought consider what I have to say.  Do you think that was circular? 

        Element talk:.


        Beryllium 4: I just love beryl - I love an emerald in the sea! 

        Boron:  5:  solid as a rock;

        Carbon 6: pretty as a diamond;

        Nitrogen 7:  blowing in the wind;


        A good link Kropoktin:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Kropotkin


        Oxygen 8:  good for life;


        So ends today's posting:  A special day in my way of reckoning things.  5210.  About 2:27 pm, EST.


        So if you don't mind, today it is May 4, 2010 (the day before Cinco de Mayo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinco_de_Mayo )......5410 as I like to say, but the purpose of this entry is to pose a question.  I said earlier that 5210 was "special" to me, and why do you think this is? (that is not my question that I'm posing....it was rhetorical).  Well, this is why:  5 x 2 = 10.  From a Periodic Table standpoint, what do you think this means?  (that is the question I am posing).

        Be aware that the reciprocal of 10 is quite the number.  More importantly, the reciprocal of the square root of 10 is truly "something else" and without it we would not be here is what I think.......here is another link:  เงินฟรี ufabet ทางเข้า  (I am very sad to report that this link no longer directs to its previous destination, which was so much better - I'm leaving it here because it still goes in that direction, but not nearly as easily as it used to and that is why I'm sad about it......knowledge ought be freely shared -

        Holy Moses - literally just today, 112316, I actually clicked on the link again, and lo & behold, the old destination is back.  Funny how things like that happen sometimes.  Funny and good I suppose).


        Let me add that we have 10 toes along with 8 fingers and 2 thumbs - do you think this is a coincidence?  It ain't.  Lastly, if "we" used a base 8 numbering system, would there be a value that has the same atrributes as the reciprocal of the square root of 10?  I suspect the answer is........well, actually, I am plum not sure about this, nor am I sure I want to figure it out.  What difference would it make.  A reciprocal that is essentially a reflection of itself is simply fascinating to me and speaks to many mysterious combinations in the world of numbers, and the same holds true with the elements of the Periodic Table.  That is what I think.  A reciprocal that is an irrational number and is also a reflection of itself is even more fascinating....just amazing....just wonderful and so connected to almost essentially everything!

        Peace out Amigos and Happy Cinco de Mayo!

        It is March 5th.  2011.  9:44 am Eastern (US) Standard Time:  Take a cube.  Roll it hard.  It will break up into how many planes?  6 of course.  Reorient the planes however you please.  How many possible shapes are there?  Now I better understand 6 and after it comes the Nitrogen cloud....thank goodness for that.

        See you later,

        Ken Hausle