Ed Leedskalnin's comment

I found interesting comments from someone who built the Coral Castle. Obviously he knows something we don't.

"You know we receive an education in the schools from books. All those books that people became educated from twenty-five years ago, are wrong now, and those that are good now, will be wrong again twenty-five years from now. So if they are wrong then, they are also wrong now, and the one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is misled. All books that are written are wrong, the one who is not educated cannot write a book and the one who is educated, is really not educated but he is misled and the one who is misled cannot write a book which is correct.
The misleading began when our distant ancestors began to teach their descendants. You know they knew nothing but they passed their knowledge of nothing to the coming generations and it went so innocently that nobody noticed it. That is why we are not educated.
Now I will tell you what education is according to my reasoning. An educated person is one whose senses are refined. We are born as brutes, we remain and die as the same if we do not become polished. But all senses do not take polish. Some are to coarse to take it. The main base of education is one's "self-respect". Any one lacking self-respect cannot be educated. The main bases of self-respect is the willingness to learn, to do only the things that are good and right, to believe only in the things that can be proved, to possess appreciation and self control.
Now, if you lack willingness to learn, you will remain as a brute and if you do things that are not good and right, you will be a low person, and if you believe in things that cannot be proved, any feeble minded person can lead you, and if you lack appreciation, it takes away the incentive for good doing and if you lack self control you will never know the limit.
So all those lacking these characteristics in their makeup are not educated."
Ed Leedskalnin, 1936.

Neutrinos Must Be Tachyons

=============================================
GENEVA (AP) -- Scientists at the world's largest physics lab say they have clocked subatomic particles traveling faster than light. If that's true, it would break - if not severely twist - a fundamental pillar of physics.

Nothing is supposed to go faster than light. But scientists say that neutrinos - one of the strangest well-known particles in physics - smashed past the cosmic speed barrier of 186,282 miles per second (299,792 kilometers).
=============================================

The world of physics is certainly changing although in slow pace. I published the paper regarding the nature of neutrinos in LLNL archive in 1997. Now it seems like the real experimental proof is coming. This result is going to change the shape of our physics for ever.

The paper was based on the examination of the data from the neutron decay experiment and from the comparison of the data from the supernova explosion, and also from the observation of the lack of the evidence on whereabouts of the massive number of neutrinos in the universe. They (neutrinos) must exist somewhere but no one knows where. And surprisingly no one seems to be bothered by its lack of precise residency.

The mass squared value of the neutrinos has been consistently reported to be negative, yet scientists have been reluctant to admit that neutrinos can be tachyons. I suggested rather boldly at the time that all the neutrinos must be tachyons. There were other previous researchers (Chodos et al)who claimed that some of the neutrinos may be tachyons.

In this new frame of physics, neutrinos are always traveling faster than the speed of light. Contrary to the matter particles, neutrinos possess more energy when it travels slower. The world of neutrinos is like the opposite side of our reality.

Now the more serious side of this experimental proof of neutrinos speed of travel is that, the quantum mechanics can be explained as a random statistical interaction between neutrinos and charged particles. God really doesn't play dice.

Another consequence of this is that neutrino's pure kinetic interaction with matter particles can create the effect of gravity. I think I already mentioned this picture somewhere in this blog. The mechanical nature of neutrinos is essential to the understanding of the physical effect of dipole gravity.

The Book “Gravitation” by Charles W. Misner, Kip S. Thorne and John A. Wheeler

If you are a graduate student of the gravitational physics, you will most likely be using the book “Gravitation” as the class material. The instructor or the professor can choose different text books but in all likelihood this will be the book of their choice. This book prepares the future physicists who will practice the profession of performing the research or teaching gravitational physics for the future generation. Due to the sheer size of the volume of the book, it is not easy to sift through all the materials and get to the necessary information. You can easily get intimidated by the shear amount of the information presented in the book. What is written in the book is considered an accurate presentation of the up to date knowledge regarding the solution(s) of general relativity.

Now let’s open the page 991 of the book and pay attention to the equation (36.19a). The newer version of the book may have different equation number but this is from the version printed in 1970. There are other chapters dealing with this equation but this page has the most details.

What the equation (36.29a) presented in the book is from the weak field approximation of general relativity for a slowly rotating source which is very close to a planetary solar system. As you can see, there is the Newtonian gravity and then the dipole gravity (dj) plus the quadrupole moment (Ijk). If there was a general relativistic solution for the solar system, this equation must be it.

In the 1970 version of the book, regarding the (gravitational) dipole moment, it says [if he chooses the origin of coordinate carefully, he can make dj=0].


This is how the gravitational dipole moment was thrown out in general relativity. The reasons we have “gravitomagnetism: the modified version of Maxwell’s equation for gravity” is because they dropped this gravitational dipole moment term long time ago. You may say “but that term has no physical meaning since the beginning of general relativity and regarded as such”.

It doesn’t matter how long “wrong” has been wrong. It is still wrong. A false can not become a truth just because it has been false for a long time or mistaken to be truth by many.

If this term were really zero and had no physical meaning, the Lense-Thirring force should also have been zero also because they are from the same origin. But the Lense-Thirring forces are not zero and have been known as such.

This was also the reason people have suspected that general relativity may fail because it doesn’t have the solution for rotating stellar objects. The dark matter problem couldn’t be solved with general relativity because they tossed out this dipole term very long time ago and no one has challenged such an interpretation.

What we are witnessing here is an apocalyptic revelation. And the deadly attempt to hide the mistake. This may be the human nature Einstein may have been referring to about the "infinity of human stupidity".

The gigantic jigsaw puzzle was solved by one stone, one stroke of a pen.

This dipole gravity is a totally new force of the nature. Considering that there are only four known forces in physics, the importance of it can not be under estimated.

Why have the early investigators missed the dipole gravity?

According to the Newtonian mechanics, there is no permanent displacement of the center of mass relative to the origin of the coordinate system. You can always shift the origin of the coordinate system in such a way that such a displacement can be removed. In fact, there is no such concept as the displacement of the center of mass in Newtonian gravity at all.

The question here would be, should general relativity honor the conclusion of the old Newtonian mechanics? The answer is no, it doesn’t have to. The reason is because general relativity may contain information that can be valid only if the new mechanical principle is applied.

The more fundamental reason is because general relativity may contain a new paradigm of physics which can be thrown away easily if the old mechanical principle is imposed mindlessly onto the new theory of physics, which is exactly what happened.

In fact, the phenomenon of the dynamical center of mass shift should have been raised as an important issue of a physical anomaly as soon as special relativity was published, because the rotation of the conical or hemispherical rotor generates an unexpected type of dynamical shift of the center of mass not known in Newtonian mechanics. If this issue had been studied and examined in depth prior to the publication of general relativity, the adaptation of dipole gravity would have been easy and painless. But unfortunately this didn’t happen.

At the first cursory look, special relativity didn’t look like violating the Newtonian mechanical principle. But as we can see directly from the example of the rotating hemispherical rotor, the Newtonian mechanical principle breaks down immediately because the object in rotation shifts its effective center of mass without being pushed in the direction of the shift of the center of mass in direct violation of the first law of the Newtonian mechanics.

The end of the old era of physics happened with the publication of special relativity, yet it was not recognized by the people. And this trend continued even after the publication of general relativity.

Now it is easy to see that the time has come to organize all these messy contradictions and physical anomalies and make a brave and gigantic conclusion.

The Newtonian mechanics was not complete. There are cases that the center of mass of an object can change without the external force that makes the shift of the center of mass.
This also means that there are cases that a body can get acceleration without the due propulsion force in the direction of the shift of the center of mass. The discussion on this subject has been published in the first paper of dipole gravity.

This paradigm shift will nicely fit the revival of dipole gravity and the modification of the Newtonian mechanics. This is the physics of the next civilization that will be valid for thousands of years to come.

Tachyonic Kinematics

A little bit of investigation of the kinetic interaction of the tachyonic particles with the ordinary matter particles shows the interesting behavior of the tachyons. The fundamental principle in the kinematics of physics is the energy-momentum conservation. In this equations, it can be shown that as the tachyons lose energy, they travel faster in complete opposite of the behavior of the ordinary particles. As the ordinary matter particles tend to stay in the state of rest as they lose all of their kinetic energy, the tachyons prefer to stay in the highest speed as possible. One can conjecture that it could be the infinite speed, however, this is not realistic, so we may contend that it will become as close to infinity.

If there is such a thing as the instant communication between the two separate spatial locations in the universe, this must be it.

If the advanced civilizations have mastered this technology, the efforts of the SETI would be fruitless because the electromagnetic radio wave would be the most inefficient method of communication in the universe.

The ripple through the fabric of the universe happens because of the tendency of the these tachyonic neutrinos to be stabilized in terms of their density and population. One may wonder how the advanced civilizations in the universe are able to detect the abnormal generation of the neutrinos at the far corners of the universe. This suggests that the fabric of the universe can be disturbed by the unusual massive generation of the beta decay where the abundant neutrinos are produced. In terms of the mundane word, this means the chain reaction of the fissionable atomic material which would be totally unnatural in terms of the spontaneous flow of the cosmic event, which could easily arouse the curiosity and attention by the extra terrestrial civilization if they exist.

It seems to me the number of the tachyons also determines the volume of the universe itself just like the number of the air molecules inside a balloon determines the size of the balloon itself. If the black holes can absorb some of these tachyonic neutrinos, they will certainly contribute to the shrinkage of the universe. In the four dimensional universe, the three dimensional space is contained but it certainly would be perceived as infinite by the three dimensional entities.

Interesting Comment of Nikola Tesla and Dipole Gravity

"Today's scientist have substituted mathematics for experiments and they wander off through equation after equation and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality."

Nikola Tesla

I found the above quote of Nikola Tesla from the web site of John Bedini who is the electronics genius of today. The correctness of the source is as good as that of John Bedini's. But I think it makes sense that the above statements could have been made by Nikola Tesla. He could be referring to Einstein's general relativity and also many of the Thermodynamical equations which may have been considered a symptom of "wandering off" from the reality in Tesla's point of view. My personal take on this is that the statement of Nikola Tesla can be a perfect description for the presently known theory of quantum gravity. For example, the theory of Quantum gravity could not find dipole gravity which is a macroscopic phenomenon.

The scope of quantum gravity is pretty much the same as general relativity. The fundamental question of "if gravity is a quantum phenomenon" has not even been settled yet. It is still in the domain of a conjecture. The obvious attempt to incorporate the gravity into quantum theory has failed in the first step when they couldn't find a method to renormalize it, which is a critical step to make any sense out of a quantum theory because the infinities in the quantum field theory are formidable beasts that need to be regulated with a systematic subtraction. They haven't found a method to regulate quantum gravity to make the prediction of the theory to compare it with the experimental data.

While he was right in many ways, my objection to Nikola Tesla's statement is that the mathematical equations in physics still matters especially when you know exactly what each variables in the equation mean.

When they solved general relativity in the weak field approximation, which is the only solution that the mundane, measurable day to day world can be described, they found the Newtonian gravity, dipole gravity and the gravitational quadrupole moment. The Newtonian gravity was expected because any theory of generalized gravity should recover Newtonian gravity in its first approximation. If it doesn't, then the generalized theory of gravity would be wrong. There would be no need to pursue such a theory any further.

And then there was the dipole term which was quickly dismissed because the mathematical term describing the gravitational dipole moment requires the physically meaningful displacement of the center of mass of the object.

The only known displacement of the center of mass in Newtonian mechanics is by the displacement of the origin of the coordinate system. However, this was too trivial if anybody can notice it. Ok, let's put the origin of the coordinate system back to the center of mass of the object and, voila, we don't have to worry about the dipole term anymore. It is gone.

This was how the second order "mathematical term" of general relativity was treated and eliminated in the solution of general relativity. I emphasized the "mathematical" because I'm here trying to invoke the ghostly specter of the
"mathematics" in direct contrast to Nikola Tesla's early observation.

I noticed the oddity of this interpretation in 1982, when I was a graduate student of U of M, when I heard the news that they (physicists)explained the jets using the magnetic field and the plasma model in the black hole. I could not exactly put my finger in it but I felt it was simply very odd. The model did not sound very elegant, because it didn't give you the satisfaction of the ah ha moment. The other impression was that the back hole should be an intensely gravitational object not an electromagnetic one and the observed length of the jets in both directions seems to be the same contrary to the electromagnetic theory would predict.

If general relativity had the solution for the jets from the black holes, it should be this dipole term yet it was thrown away so quickly and matter of factedly.

Mathematics !!!!

Why it can't be overlooked.

General relativity was throwing out a puzzle in the linearized theory with the mathematical term called the gravitational dipole moment. What this means is that the truthful math of general relativity had the gravitational dipole moment embedded in its structure. But the researchers in the field did not know what to make out of it. You figure out what this displacement of the center of mass means, but I won't tell you, this was exactly what general relativity was saying.

But how can you find the solution for the puzzle if you don't realize there is even a puzzle? If you accept the explanation by the theorists without critical thinking, how can you suspect there could be something wrong with the widely spread interpretation. However, my physical intuition told me there was something not quite correct in the interpretation of dipole gravity in 1982. If you had solved all the problems at the end of the each chapter of the book of Mechanics by Simon and about 80 percent of the problems in the Jackson's Electrodynamics, you will probably feel the confidence in your intuition on certain subject of physics.

I tend to forget a lot of things. I sometimes search for the keys in my pocket or that I put on a plainly visible table. The more plainly visible place I put it, the harder to find it. I also frequently forget my wife's birthday. But I do not forget the oddities in nature or something that does not follow the expected routine.

Somehow the oddity of the gravitational dipole moment remained in my memory for a long time until I performed a little experiment thirteen years later in 1995 in my mental picture about the center of mass of the rotating hemisphere with special relativity incorporated.

This mental experiment may not mean much to a lot of people. It is purely an exercise of a gedanken experiment. Now in the instant frozen moment of time, the
collectively rotating hemispherical solid object will show the shift of the dynamic center of mass because the dynamic mass increase will be non uniform over the entire volume of the object since a certain part of the object will move faster than other locations and the averaged position of the center of mass will remain skewed because of the longitudinal asymmetry of the object, and also because the center of mass is the averaged location of the object relative to the rest of the universe.

Why this is not normal? Because it violates the first principle of the Newtonian mechanics which says that an object without being subjected to the external force will remain at the same position. The rotating hemisphere changes its dynamic center of mass without being pushed in the direction of the shift of the center of mass.

In the terrestrial experiment, this effect will certainly be negligible. The actual shift will be too small to measure. However, if the dimension of the object becomes a massive stellar object, this effect will not be small.

And additionally, this physically measurable quantity makes the gravitational dipole moment meaningful in general relativity and the strength of it depends on the rotating frequency of the source. Voila, we found the magnetic gravity purely from general relativity that describes the rotating objects.

As it came out of the violation of the first principle of the Newtonian mechanics, this isolated gravitational dipole moment has the antigravitational propulsion effect that can set itself in motion in the mass filled universe spontaneously. This is the most astounding revelation in our physical sciences. And this is the consequence of the standard mathematics of general relativity.

Please notice that it was in "MATHEMATICS".

Never underestimate the power of "mathematics" in the "verified" theories of physics.

General relativity and Maxwell's equation are pretty much considered verified theories in physics.

Even if you may overhaul the entire physics of the universe, it will still boil back down to these two fundamental principles of physics in the macroscopic world.

I tend to believe that the secret of the universe can be found from inside the known physical theories by finding out the conflicting anomalies they have among themselves in addition to the way how the symmetry of the nature is broken.

For example, while the mystery of the possible presence of the magnetic monopole is still prevailing among scientists due to the unpleasant out of symmetry between the electric charges and that of the magnets in the Maxwell's equation, how many people see the mysterious and puzzling mass of the neutrinos in the standard electroweak theory has any ramifications to it.

It seems to me the neutrinos are the most ill understood particles in the universe in our physics today, if I'm allowed to make a conjecture on what can be the possible future breakthrough in our knowledge of physics.

No one knows exactly where these neutrinos are despite the staggering number of their existence which is the same as the number of the electrons in the universe. And surprisingly no one seems to be puzzled by it. And not many seem to see the glaring mathematical possibility that the neutrinos can be tachyons.

Again, it is all in mathematics. If we assume that the neutrinos are tachyons, how many mysteries in the universe will be solved instantly !!!!.

The Truth of the Conventional Gravitomagnetism

The Gravity Probe B experiment was conducted supposedly to detect the frame dragging effect "predicted" by general relativity aka by "gravitomagnetism".

However, if you take a look at the theory of gravitomagnetism carefully, you realize that it is "not" in fact general relativity. It is a theory derived from the modified Maxwell's equation to make it look like a gravitational effect. I couldn't believe that the official web pages of Gravity Probe B openly announces that they are testing general relativity.

But the general relativity community has already concluded that the magnet equivalent dipole gravity does not exist in general relativity long time ago. The mathematical term corresponding to dipole gravity exists but it was concluded that the term has no physical meaning. That conclusion is written in the text books of gravity including that of John Wheeler, Kip Thorne and Charles Misner.

Then what is this object called "Gravitomagnetism"? It has the DNA of the Maxwell's equation but it is not exactly the same as the Electromagnetism. In the early days of the development of general relativity, the gravitational physicists desperately needed to find the magnet like gravity from somewhere, but they could not find it inside the general relativity because they have already thrown out the mathematical term that was assigned the name "gravitational dipole moment". So, they created one from a piece here and another piece there by modifying the Maxwell's equation and made up this theory called gravitomagnetism. The assumption that the gravity will be topologically similar to the electromagnetism expressed by Maxwell's equation was a pure conjecture that was not tested at all. Even in the approximation, there was no guarantee that it will be the true depiction of the physical reality. It was obviously not the pure legitimate child of general relativity. It was born out of the Maxwell's equation and then adopted by the general relativity community and since then it went by as a child of general relativity without being contested. This is the birth history of the gravitomagnetism.

I can understand that they didn't know how the center of mass of an object can be shifted without any external force contrary to the Newtonian mechanics. But they know now. I showed it in my two papers listed in my scientific document list. It doesn't take an hour to show how the shift of the center of mass happens in the framework of relativity theory with 100 percent certainty, with the precise mathematical form for the model object.

The irony is that they do not seem to care of this revelation. Somehow it doesn't seem to matter to them. "We know now we have been wrong but who are you to tell us we all have been wrong?" is kind of their attitude.

What kind of arrogance is that?

What is the purpose of testing the atomic fine structure constant in such an accuracy in the first place? The physical science is after all about the accuracy and the precision, isn't it?

Whether it is in the matter of the fine structure constant or in the theoretical conceptual details in gravity, we strive to be accurate.

The dipole gravity effect that comes out of the dynamic shift of the center of mass from the rotating rigid body may look like a tiny, drop in a bucket, effect as it truly looks like one. But, still, that dipole term is the strongest gravity effect next to Newtonian in general relativity. It can not be ignored by any means.

On top of that, that's what science is all about, finding the details to reach the greatest accuracy. We spent close to a billion dollars to investigate the rotational gravity effect with GP-B. Yet they are comparing their data with the modified Maxwell's equation not with the genuine general relativity. It's like comparing an apple with an orange. They simply can not match. And the NASA announced that the GP-B experiment was a flop.

If your experimental result doesn't produce the predicted effect, isn't it time to investigate if the theory was correct in the first place at the same time investigating if there was any error in your experiment? Both activities should go hand in hand.

One may try to argue that, after all, general relativity might not have been correct at all. The so far known solution of general relativity has been wrong on the part of the gravitational dipole moment. However, that is a totally different issue compared to the question of if general relativity was correct at all. General relativity is such a gigantic yet simple framework of the theory of gravity that there is not much to go wrong except the detailed solutions that humans miss in the learning process of the theory. After all, Einstein himself missed it. He didn't know dipole gravity could be a meaningful solution of general relativity.

Someone asked me "Are you greater than Einstein?" to say Einstein missed the solution of dipole gravity that you found in his own theory? I'm a very modest and seclusive person. But if my discovery of dipole gravity can make me greater than Einstein, so be it. It's not my duty to assess my own achievement. It is up to the people in the coming generations in the field of science to decide.

These are the reasons that the GP-B experiment data is crucial to test the reality of dipole gravity as well as general relativity itself. That's why it is so important.

If I were one of them who have conducted the GP-B experiment, I would try to reproduce the so called "electrostatic patch effect" from the earth bound laboratory test to prove their own conjecture regarding the source of the error. If they can not reproduce the same error, the patch effect conjecture can not be right. And this will give their experimental data more credence.

However, if they knew the strength of the dipole gravity was so large, as predicted by dipole gravity, the level of the precision they achieved with their equipment would not have been necessary.

Even the GPS satellite could have been enough to test the dipole gravity effect. The oscillations of the GPS satellites along the equatorial plane of the rotating earth above the ground was already a direct proof of dipole gravity.

What baffled the GP-B experimental team initially was that they detected the unexpectedly large signal that they never expected to observe. Basically, they detected the new force that is topologically and quantitatively different from the one predicted by the theory of the gravitomagnetism which is a direct proof that the gravity has no resemblance to the electromagnetism, defying the widely spread conjecture that the rotational gravity will follow the Maxwellian paradigm.

When they announced that their results matched with the theory of gravitomagnetism within 10 percent or so was after the subtraction of this huge signal, which they regarded as error, from their data. This of course is a total nonsense. The systematic error can not be larger than the signal, which was the reason in the first place that NASA announced the GP-B experiment was a flop.

For a net dipole gravity effect to manifest, not only the rotation but also the longitudinal asymmetry of the rotating body is necessary, the fact of which could not be deduced from the analogy with the Maxwell's equation. In other words, the conventional gravitmagnetism was an unfortunate attempt of the theoretical experiment that did not turn out to be correct.

The fundamental premises of the conventional theory of gravitomagnetism was that like in the case of the Maxwell's equation where the movement of the charge creates the magnetic field, the motion of the mass should create the magnet like gravity, regardless of the geometrical shape of the rotating body, which was a totally failed assumption.

General relativity had its own way of creating the magnet like gravity.

Revisit the Old Question of The Energy of The Electric Field

Suppose there is charge Q on a metallic sphere of radius R and the electric field generated by the charge at the distance r is given by Q/(4*pi*e0*r). Now the question is "where is the energy located due to this charge?". The conventional wisdom generally conveyed in the text books is that the energy is in the entire space of the electric field created by the charge Q.

This misconception has created a huge misunderstanding in the physics of electricity and magnetism. In fact, unless there is a separate electric charge nearby or in the entire space around this source charge Q, there is no EM energy in the space(outside of the conductor) due to this charge Q. Instead, the energy is within the charge Q inside the metallic sphere itself repelling each other as the electrons or the ions exert the force against each other as individual entities.

In the case of the concentric spherical capacitor, the electric field in between the two shells comes only from the charges in the inner sphere. However the energy stored in this concentric configuration comes from the attractive force between this electric field and the charges in the outer sphere. So there is no increase in the strength of the electric field between the shells due to the charges in the outer sphere. It is only the additional electrostatic energy in the entire configuration that springs up.

After all, it requires two spatially separated charges in space to create an electrostatic potential energy. So, if two electrons are spatially separated in space, they will create the electrostatic potential energy.

Now the serious question is if the two electrons can be considered to be in the three dimensional space if they are within the voluminous metal(how small it may be), which is the fundamental question that has never been asked seriously in physics.

Suppose there is a thin straight copper wire of length L.

Now, let's put two electrons in this copper wire. Where will these two electrons be located once they are put inside the conducting wire?

Remember the interior of the metallic conductors are free zone for the electric charges within the physical boundary according to our well established Solid State Physics. There is no restriction of the movement of the charges inside the metal. So, it is natural to expect that the two electrons will tend to be separated as far away from each other as much as possible. So the answer to the question regarding the location of the two electrons will be "far at the end of the wire".

One electron in one end of the wire and the other on the other end of the wire. The electric field created by these two electrons is very complex and the analytic solution will be next to impossible and so is the case with the cylindrical configuration. This is the reason the concentric spherical capacitor becomes such an ideal example to prove the case of the capacitor anomaly.

Now the next question is "Is there any electrostatic potential energy between these two electrons?" Yes there should be.

So the energy of the electric charge Q located inside the metallic sphere is not in the space outside of the metal. The energy is inside the metal in the form of the electrostatic repulsive force.

This sounds like an obvious and mundane statement. But the implication of this statement is in the fact that we can not dismiss the self energy inside the charged capacitors which has been out of the physical reality in our conventional theory of electricity and magnetism for the last 160 years of the human civilization.