Contact us



Welcome to CPH Theory Siteبه سایت نظریه سی پی اچ خوش آمدید



C reative



  CPH Theory is based  on  Generalized light velocity from energy  into mass.


CPH Theory in Journals



Opinion: Australia 'killing Earth' says NASA scientist




Opinion: Australia 'killing Earth' says NASA scientist


One of NASA’s top scientists, The head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, Prof. James Hansen, has told President elect Obama that Australian coal exports are guaranteeing destruction of life on Earth.

Thanks for the in-depth appraisal, mate. Nothing like a character reference from the top. 

Hansen isn’t a melodramatist. He’s referring to our antiquated approach to carbon economics. 

The Daily Telegraph:

Prof Hansen said goals and caps on carbon emissions were practically worthless because of the long lifetime of carbon dioxide in the air. 

“Instead a large part of the total fossil fuels must be left in the ground. In practice, that means coal,” he wrote. 

“Nobody realistically expects that the large readily available pools of oil and gas will be left in the ground.”

Prof. Hansen also thinks Australia’s emissions cuts targets won’t work. He’s not alone there, nor do many Australian environmentalists. 

The problem is that Australia is a resource exporter. China and Japan want our coal. It’s a multi billion dollar export, even at $100 or so a ton. He’s not wrong about it not getting left in the ground. 

Nobody is disputing the effects of CO2 in the atmosphere. Quite the opposite. The low emission cuts targets raised a howl in Australia. 

The problem, Prof. Hansen, is antiquated energy industries, where switching carbon to non combustion uses is proceeding at its usual dinosaur like rate. The whole concept of energy economics, and the training of most of the people in the industries, is stuck in the Model T era. 

Stage 2 should be explaining to President Obama how to get the industries functioning as ecological saviors, not destroyers. 

The oil industry has the best distribution system on Earth. It can sell any form of fuel or energy source. It doesn’t actually have to sell carbon as fuel. Nor does the coal industry. The stuff’s more valuable in almost any other form than stuffing it into an engine and detonating it, anyway. 

Carbon chemistry isn't quite a secret. The other uses are worth millions a week to BHP Billiton alone. Bucky balls (designer carbon molecular lubricants) have been around for years, etc. Now all they have to do is start training these morons in other uses for their product. Oil and coal have been one trick wonders for so long it's like nobody's ever heard of polymers. 

Hansen isn’t wrong. He’s just taken one side of an argument as the talking point. I agree with his basic concept. The continuing use of carbon based combustion is eco-suicide. 

The solution has to be getting the Corporate Carboniferous Cornucopia doing something useful, not destroying the thermal properties of the atmosphere. Even people with commerce degrees can understand basic high school physics, surely? Eventually? Thirty years after the issues were raised? Maybe? 

If America happens to stumble across its own basic alternative energy technology that it's had for decades, that will become the model for everyone else. Even our sheep in suits will get the message. Once they can see carbon as a paying proposition in other forms, it will take off.

Really, this shouldn't have to be explained to adults. It really is high school stuff, and we have gigantic industries getting pennies for a material worth billions. Are we sure they teach energy industry people to read, or what?

Might have been slightly more appropriate to mention some of the other major carbon producers, though

his opinion article was written by an independent writer. The opinions and views expressed herein are those of the author and are not necessarily intended to reflect those of DigitalJournal.com

Source: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/264627





1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  Newest articles














General Science Journal

World Science Database

Hadronic Journal

National Research Council Canada

Journal of Nuclear and Particle Physics

Scientific Journal of Pure and Applied Science

Sub quantum space and interactions from photon to fermions and bosons

Interesting articles

English Articles

Faster Than Light 

Light that travels…faster than light!

Before the Big Bang

Structure of Charge Particles

Move Structure of Photon

Structure of Charge Particles

Faster Than Light 

Light that travels…faster than light!

Before the Big Bang

Structure of Charge Particles

Move Structure of Photon

Structure of Charge Particles

Zero Point Energy and the Dirac Equation [PDF]

Speed of Light and CPH Theory [PDF]

Color Charge/Color Magnet and CPH [PDF]

Sub-Quantum Chromodynamics [PDF]

Effective Nuclear Charge [PDF]

Maxwell's Equations in a Gravitational Field [PDF]

 Realization Hawking - End of Physics by CPH [PDF]

Questions and Answers on CPH Theory [PDF]

Opinions on CPH Theory [PDF]

Analysis of CPH Theory

Definition, Principle and Explanation of CPH Theory [PDF]

Experimental Foundation of CPH Theory [PDF]

Logical Foundation of CPH Theory [PDF]

A New Mechanism of Higgs Bosons in Producing Charge Particles [PDF]

CPH Theory and Newton's Second Law [PDF]

CPH Theory and Special Relativity [PDF]

Properties of CPH [PDF]

Time Function and Work Energy Theorem [PDF]

Time Function and Absolute Black Hole [PDF] 

Thermodynamic Laws, Entropy and CPH Theory [PDF]

Vocabulary of CPH Theory [PDF] 

Quantum Electrodynamics and CPH Theory [PDF] 

Summary of Physics Concepts [PDF]

Unification and CPH Theory [PDF] 

Strong Interaction and CPH Theory [PDF]


Since 1962 I doubted on Newton's laws. I did not accept the infinitive speed and I found un-vivid the laws of gravity and time.

I learned the Einstein's Relativity, thus I found some answers for my questions. But, I had another doubt of Infinitive Mass-Energy. And I wanted to know why light has stable speed?




free hit counters

Copyright © 2013 CPH Theory

Last modified 12/22/2013