Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Historically, Koreans tend to distance themselves from the Manchus and the Hyung-nos(Huns) as they were considered nomadic horse riding barbarians who do not know how to discuss the Confucian philosophy using the highly sophisticated Chinese hieroglyphs. It can not be overlooked that Koreans aligned themselves with the Han Chinese as being educated and civilized compared to their more immediate kins of the northern Asia. So you can see there was a great deal of pretentiousness on the part of the so called scholars in the ancient Korean society.
One of the interesting observations in this respect is that Chinese called ancient Koreans "Dong Yi" meaning "The Eastern Tribe riding on a horse carrying a bow and arrows". The Chinese hieroglyphs "Yi" depicts a person riding on a horse with a bow and arrow. So, basically what it means is that the ancient Koreans were also viewed by Chinese as a nomadic horse riding people not much different than Huns(Hyung No) and Manchus, until they settled down in the peninsula to form an agricultural society. In fact, the famous Chinese historian "Sa Ma Chon" wrote in his book "Sa Ki" that Confucius was from "Dong Yi". More specifically it is the area of the present day San dong peninsula which belonged to the proto Koreans in ancient times. When Chin Si Huang Di unified the greater China, Sandong and Manchu were not part of it. Later Sandong people conquered China, expanded its territory and established Han dynasty. The sound Han is the same as that of Hun and Han of ancient Koreans who shared the Tungusic language. The correct sound of Han, Hun is "Kheun" in the present day Korean language which means "Big" and "Great". Obviously, Hun people liked to call their country "great" whenever they built one. So it was Dongyi people who ruled the greater China in Han dynasty. We will see again that Manchus will conquer China and establish Qing dynasty. This is a repeated pattern showing how the historical China has been formed.
At the end of Koryo dynasty, the last King of Koryo ordered his general Yi Sung Gae to attack Manchuria to punish them for destroying Ming dynasty, our beloved Chinese friends. It is the spirit of Koryo dynasty that attracts the special attention. "Orangke" which Koreans called Manchus means savage barbarians.
Sadly, general Yi Sung Gae returned from his post and took the crown and established Chosun(Yi) dynasty. Some may think he was a hero but he was a traitor to his people in a deeper sense. Jeong Mong Ju was the last scholar of Koryo dynasty who opposed general Yi and paid the ultimate price. He was the last honorable scholar of Koryo dynasty who chose the loyalty and principle over the power and wealth. Because he was promised by Yi Sung Gae the greatest role in the new dynasty if he had cooperated. The triumphant spirit of the great Koryo people was ruthlessly mutilated by Yi Sung Gae and his ensuing dynasty, which has wasted most of their time and energy debating on the worthless subject like how many days the sons have to show remorse when their parents or the Kings were deceased, when Japanese were diligently developing the modern technology. The deadly trap of the Confucian philosophy is in the fact that it emphasizes too heavily on how you will be looked at by others in your behavior than how you truly feel inside of yourself. It may be called a philosophy of teaching the most sophisticated pretentiousness in life. But it certainly has its greatest merit which can not be ignored like the strong emphasis on learning. The book of Confucius starts with the saying "Isn't it the most joyful thing to learn and practice every day?" Of course, it depends on what you learn.
Basically, Yi dynasty was fearful of the fact that some military general may revolt and take their dynasty away from them and subsequently neglected in building up the military and technology for the self defense of the nation. Their sins were their worst enemy. As a consequence, Chosun dynasty left the lasting impression of being a timid nation to Japan and China vulnerable to their attacks.
The major reason for this observation that the Manchus and the Huns were more close to Koreans is in the language they use if not the completely identical physical features. The so called Tungstic language which is also called Hunnic language is unique in the sense that the majority of the languages in the world are not like it in terms of the particular grammatical structures. It is known that the Turkish and the Hungarians share the same structure of the language. Unless you have learned any one of these languages, you have no idea how different the Hunnic language is.
The fact that Koreans, Mongols, Japanese, Hungarians and Turkish share this particular kind of the structure of the language is no coincidence. It depicts the trail of the migration and spread of the Hunnic people.
In fact, Manchuria was a greater part of Korean territory in ancient times as admitted by the main stream Chinese history. But it wouldn't be fair to say that Koreans lost that part of the land to China in a war. Instead, in later part of the history, Manchus conquered the mainland of China and separated themselves from the rest of the Koreans and included their land of Manchuria to the rest of the China and established Qing dynasty.
It is not very well publicized fact but it is well worth to note that the Chinese language is more close to Europeans than that of Koreans. It belongs to a part of the so called Indo-European language group. In this particular language group, which is shared by the majority of the languages in the world, the order of the words placed in a sentence is very important while in Tungustic language, they have distinctive sounds that attached to the words specifying if the word is a subject, an object or a verb, which makes the meaning of the sentence very clear even when the order of the words are all shuffled around.
Somehow the Manchurians totally assimilated their grammatical structure of the language into Chinese. But in terms of the pronunciation of the individual Chinese letter system, the Mandarin(standard Chinese spoken language originated from Manchus) pronunciation is more close to that of Koreans than that of Cantonese as one would naturally expect.
As is well known more from the European history, the Huns(Hyungnos)(Chinese built the great wall to protect themselves from the Huns) in the 4th century conquered most part of the Europe and contributed to the ultimate fall of the Rome. The Hunnic people settled down in the modern day great plain field of Budapest Hungary. So, it is not surprising to see that Hungarians speak Hunnic language to this day. The majority of the women Huns brought with them must have settled down there to influence the mother tongue of the whole country. No wonder Europeans have been wondering why Hungarian language is so difficult to learn. The modern day Hungarians do not hide the fact that their ancestors were Huns. Also they are very proud of naming their sons by the name Attila to the chagrin of their heavily Rome influenced neighbors. Still it must be noted that the King Attila the Hun had many children from many of his wives, who inherited his vast conquered Kingdoms in Europe. It is not surprising to see that King Charlemagne is considered one of his descendants.
The historical role of Yamato faction in Japan must also be noted, which is very interesting. Korean history writes that the ancient Baikje kingdom of Korea(south west of the peninsula) had their colony in Japan 1500 years ago. Coincidentally, the last general of Baikje Kingdom, Gae Baik, killed himself like in the Samurai tradition, cutting his own stomach with a sword and killing all of his family(to prevent them from being humiliated by the enemy) upon taking the responsibility of failing to protect his country. The royal family of Baikje kingdom sailed to Japan after the fall of the country by Shilla(south east of the peninsula) and Chinese(Tang dynasty) coalition force. Considering that the written Japanese history starts about this time, it can be concluded that Baikje dynasty was at the core of the unification of the countless Japanese islanders and the establishment of the emperor family which lasted ever since. Most of the core historical tradition of Japanese culture was originated from Baikje kingdom and obviously the Samurai tradition was one of them.
From the far west of Europe to the far east of Japan, Hunnic people left their foot prints and the strongest political and social influences. And of course, those countries have become the major super powers of the modern world. This can hardly be a coincidence.
One may be able to find the deeper root of the meaning of it from the following observation. Nothern Europeans never formed a unified front against Rome before the Hun's invasion of Europe in the 4th century AD. Japanese islanders couldn't be unified before the Yamato faction mobilized by the Baikje kingdom unified them all. Without Baikje's intervention, Japan could have been left pretty much like the modern day Phillipine which doesn't seem to have the core soul of the nation, allowing the constant insurgent of the regional terrorist groups to this day. One can not imagine this kind of disorderly disturbances to happen in any of their islands in Japan.
The Hunnic people in the early history of mankind provided the source of the strong central government to the people of the land they conquered. And they faded away, at least it seemed they did until someone mentions of their monumental achievements. The human civilization could not have flourished without this pivotal central social mechanism. One can own a property only of the size they can visualize and reach. Clearly, the early Hunnic people had the bigger visions of it and the means to reach there.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
The rotating cylinder in general relativity poses an interesting mechanical system. It is a system that the researchers in the field considered seriously a time machine may be possible in the strong relativistic regime. Without going into a detailed mathematics, we can visualize what is going to happen in the rotating cylinder within the scope of dipole gravity and tachyonic mechanics. Due to the special relativistic dynamic mass increase effect, the effective gravitational field outside of the rotating cylinder will increase. So, the second order effect from general relativity will be the additional attractive force toward the center of the rotating cylinder.
If the Lense-Thirring force had the right sign, we would have to come to the conclusion that this second order effect of general relativity for a rotating cylinder would have to be outgoing, which isn't. Of course, this is another confirmation that the conventional signs of the Lense-Thirring force can not be correct. Also, there will not be any axial component of the force because the rotating infinite cylinder does not create the shift of the center of mass along the axial direction.
In the tachyonic mechanical point of view, the rotating cylindrical mass disperses and prevents the tachyonic particles from getting inside the cylindrical shell, and consequently creates a relatively higher ether vacuum, which corresponds to the increased gravitational force when viewed from the outside, but reduced inertia on the object inside the shell.
In the extremely strong field regime, when the cylinder rotates in a relativistic frequency, the inertial mass of the object inside the shell will virtually disappear. Therefore, any slight external force will make the object inside the shell to accelerate with a tremendous speed.
The time and the spatial coordinates are entangled in such a way that the motion inside the shell can no longer follow the conventional Newtonian mechanics. But the question on the time machine is a great mystery. Will it be possible to violate the causality? Even if we can travel at the speed greater than the speed of light, after the round trip, we will still be at the later time than we started, once we arrive at the original location, although we may find our friends and relatives are already deceased and we may be looking at their children. I think the key mystery is in the practical length of the cylinder. Since any physically realistic cylinder can not be infinite, there is a point in the middle of the cylinder where the field reverses its direction, or one may call it a discontinuity. Like a rotating spherical shell, the truncated cylinder must have a field reversal point in the middle that corresponds to the center of the rotating spherical shell. And we know there is a tremendously strong potential wall in the middle that doesn't allow the both way stream of the travel in the case of the rotating spherical mass shell. The symmetry is broken due to dipole gravity. To treat this problem rigorously in mathematics, one may have to assume a tiny bulge delta r of the radius near the center of the finite cylinder and let it approach to zero or let the two open ends of the cylinder to be tapered into a point with a lower density material which can be made to approach to zero. In either cases, the result will be a discontinuous field along the direction of the axis of the cylinder.
What this means in reality of the plain English is that the time travel for a physical body is prohibited by general relativity. The known general relativity interpreted by the conventional Princeton-Wheeler group of the school of gravitation was not a complete understanding of the full scope of general relativity which has resulted in the erroneous concept of the time travel by the physical body. I hope the popularists of the Sci-Fi physics realize this fact and stop propagating the time travel of the physical body nonsense. At least we do not have that possibility within the full scope of our known physics.
However, this does not exclude the possibility of the tachyonic particles travel across the channel of the rotating cylinder. The information carried by the tachyonic particles can be transmitted from the future to the past or vice versa, which may hint the fact that the successful predictions of the short or the long term future, commonly known as the prophecy may be possible.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Email letter from Dr. Herbert Pfister upon the Request of Copy of his Paper “On the History of the So-Called Lense-Thirring effect”.
Dear Dr. Jeong,
In the attachment you receive my paper on the history of the so-called
Lense-Thirring effect, as published in General Relativity and Gravitation.
I have also talked about this topic at the Erice Summer School (in honour
of John Wheeler) in June 2006, whose Proceedings should appear soon at
Springer. In 3 weeks from now there will be a conference "Beyond Einstein"
in Mainz, where I again will speak about this, and about more recent
extensions (quasiglobal principle of equivalence, cosmological aspects of
dragging). These conference proceedings should later appear as a volume in
the Einstein Studies at Birkhaeuser.
Concerning the papers you attached to your mail, I should say that I
disagree with most of your arguments. I may disclose (after more than 10
years) that I have been referee for your papers submitted in 1996/97 to
Phys.Rev.Lett. and Class.Quant.Grav.. So you know most of my
counter-arguments, i.e. the coordinate dependence of your dipole moment
results. From this time I also know that other referees had similarly
In contrast, my "solution of the centrifugal force problem" in
Class.Quant.Grav. 2(1985)909, and in my article in the book "Mach's Principle"
(Tuebingen Conference, ed. by J.Barbour and H.Pfister, 1995) is approved by
most experts in the field (C.Will, K.Nordtvedt, J.Ehlers, W.Bonnor, D.Brill,
I.Ciufolini, W.Rindler et al.).
I am sorry that my opinion of your work is not more positive. (I have not
read your attached articles in detail because their content seems to be
very similar to the articles, I rejected in my function as referee.)
Response by E. Jeong
Dear Dr. Pfister,
I appreciate your email and the attached file. After reading your paper, one
question that I may have is, at some point, all the calculations have to be
based on a certain coordinate system to make any sense out of the general
covariant formulation. I think the linearized theory of general relativity
is one of such attempts where the theory of dipole gravity is based. At
least it succeeded in reproducing the Newtonian gravity.
Regarding your statement, "any physically realistic, rotating object will
suffer physical deformation, in orders omega^2 and higher". I agree with
your point that there will be a deformation due to the centrifugal force.
But is it possible to exactly quantify the degree of deformation?
I think the rigidity of the matter is a relative concept. Most importantly,
depending on the tensile strength of the material, the degree of deformation
will differ by a vast magnitude. If we assume that there is a thin spherical
mass shell of the black hole density, it won't deform until it reaches the
rotation at the surface very close to the speed of light. So, to my humble
opinion, it is possible to postulate that the rigidity of the matter can be
assumed to the highest level without the loss of generality. In fact, the
formulation of dipole gravity didn't require the fast rotation of the
spherical shell, because the shift of the center of mass starts from the
point zero. We only have to assume that the material is strong enough to
withstand the given rotational speed without deformation. In fact, the
general deformation will be certainly destructive in such a way that the
shell no longer can be considered spherical or any known form, if it is
possible, beyond a certain rotational speed.
I think dipole gravity transcends general relativity. The cosmological
evidences for its existence are overwhelming. Please remember that we had
Newtonian gravity before we knew there is general relativity. I tend to
think that if general relativity is really a correct theory of the universe,
it should have predicted the presence of dipole gravity as it did. But
dipole gravity can also exist without general relativity as a separate
entity. In my opinion, general relativity only facilitated the hint on the
presence of dipole gravity in a cryptic way.
Eue J Jeong
Email Response from Herbert Pfister,
Dear Dr. Jeong,
Concerning the deformation of my shell, I should say the following:
a) The shell is deformed in a prolate form, and this is an invariant
result, because I have calculated the invariant equatorial and polar
circumferences. In the collapse limit the form becomes spherical,
as already proven by de la Cruz, Israel (my ref. 15).
b) However, my shell does not consist of "normal material" which you can
order in a workshop. The shell was defined by the (non-material) condition
that its interior is flat, in order to fulfil Mach's demand for
"relativity of rotation" (correct Coriolis and centrifugal forces in its
Concerning your "dipole gravity", I may repeat that in GR a dipole moment
of an isolated system is a coordinate dependent statement (you can always
make the dipole moment zero by transforming to an appropriate coordinate
system). If you go beyond GR, this statement is of course no more true.
However, to go beyond GR, you have to have very strong arguments which I
do not share: GR is, on one hand, experimentally tested in so many
different regions, and in some of them with very high precision. On the
other hand, GR has overwhelming inner consistencies which rival theories
usually do not have. E.g.: equations of motion follow from the field
equations; positive energy theorem (GR is the only theory which allows to
fix the zero of energy, in contrast e.g. to Kaluza-Klein-theories, as I
could prove with Dieter Brill in Phys.Lett. B228(1989)359).
Email Response from E. Jeong,
Dear Dr. Pfister,
It seems to me you decided to cut the legs and arms of a child to make
him/her fit into an old cloth. General relativity is a brand new theory,
very sophisticated, diverse, correct and full of potential and surprise. I
don't know why anyone would want to impose a flatness condition on inside a
rotating shell to make it fit the old Machian demand for "relativity of
rotation". Basically, you artificially imposed an old condition to get the
desired solution you intended. So, in the process, no new knowledge is
Also, your statement "any physically realistic rotating body" in your paper
seems to contradict the next statement in your email, "my shell does not
consist of "normal material" which you can order in a workshop". I think
"any physically realistic material" should be considered "a normal
material". But I don't know if you can consider a neutron star as composed
of a normal material. For a cosmological consideration, I would consider
neutron star as consists of a normal matter which would be the most rigid
known material in the universe next to the black hole.
The kinetic energy which is equivalent to mass obviously increases in a
rotating mass shell. The farther from the axis of the rotation of the mass
component, the more increase of the mass. So, a rotating hemisphere develops
a dynamic shift of the center of mass while this can not be said to be true
for a rotating spherical mass shell. Is this phenomenon coordinate
dependent? If it does, what makes the rotating hemisphere different from the
rotating sphere? If we use the same coordinate transformation to make the
shift to disappear for the rotating hemisphere, it will reappear for the
rotating sphere, whatever the transformation may be.
I already discussed this problem in 1995 with Dr. Kip Thorne of Caltech, one
of the authors of the book "Gravitation", and he said "the concept of the
gravitational dipole moment makes sense...." after a lengthy debate over the
email. But I don't think I need his confirmation to know this observation is
Since the spin rotation is a separate degree of freedom of motion relative
to the linear motion, this phenomenon of the relativistic center of mass
shift for a rotating hemisphere represents a very unusual mechanical system.
It violates Newtonian mechanics straight on because you can displace an
object just by rotating it by giving it a slight impulse on the rim
perpendicular to the direction of the linear displacement. But the key
reason for the violation is special relativity, not general relativity. In a
way, general relativity clarified its property by identifying it as the
major second order term(diagonal) in the linearized theory. So we have
The simplicity of explaining the jets and the dark matter problem at the
same time using dipole gravity will be the most spectacular success of the
theory. No other theory has shown such a feat.
Plasma and magnetic field theory proposed by Blanford "explained" jets but
not the dark matter problem, on the other hand, Mondian cosmology explained
the dark matter problem but not the jets. But I always knew instinctively
that there must be a purely mechanical theory for both of the problems since
I was a graduate student at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
It basically fulfilled the dream of general relativity, as it supposed to
be. That is, the problems in the large scale universe can be explained by
general relativity. However, until 2007, I didn't notice the sign error in
the Lense-Thirring force and it impeded the explanation of the dark matter
problem. But then suddenly there came the Copernican change of the view,
what if the signs of the Lense-Thirring force were reversed?
Instantly, everything became crystal clear. The attractive radial component
of the Lense-Thirring force is only a tiny manifestation of the (medium) long
range attractive dipole gravity force and the repulsive axial component of the
Lense-Thirring force is at the core of the driving force of the jets in both
directions of the poles. The dark matter halo is a matter distribution due
to this dipole gravity force lines all around the rotating neutron stars and
the black holes. You may recall that the astronomers observed jets from the
neutron star where people do not expect the plasma will be present and the
neutron stars do not have the horizon. The theory of the jets proposed by
Blanford et al already started to crumble.
We can insist the Mach's view inside of the rotating mass shell and forget
about the jets and the dark matter problems, but if we change our
perspective and open our eyes, we can see the grandeur beauty of general
relativity, the beauty that Einstein would have loved to see in his life
Eue J Jeong
I havn't received response since Sept 4 2008.
I still think Herbert Pfister's book is an excellent reading for a complete historical review of the Mach's principle and the Lense-Thirring force before dipole gravity. Of course, his book is a living proof of how badly we have been lost in the mystery of the Lense-Thirring effect. The detailed rendition of the discussions on the subject by the numerous prominent gravitational physicists with Dr. Pfister is truly a fascinating reading.
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
The following is a part of the article in the handbook related to the academic professionals misconduct in research and searching for the truth and I found it alarming yet very interesting.
"A climate must be maintained at the University where creativity and productivity in research are promoted in an atmosphere of high ethical standards. It is essential that the integrity of research be maintained at all times, since long-standing, often irreversible damage can result from breach of academic commitment to truth in investigative activities. Misconduct in research is herein defined as gross lack of integrity in conducting basic or clinical investigations involving dishonesty, knowing misrepresentation of data, and/or violation of accepted standards. Academic misconduct or fraud can destroy public trust in the academic community as a whole and in our own institution in particular; it can shatter individual careers; it can undermine sensitive relationships between investigators, students, and the public.
In modern collaborative research, the implications of academic misconduct or fraud go far beyond the individual; they also affect collaborators whose own work has been committed to objective search for truth. The specter of guilt by association may lurk in the background for many years to come. Therefore, joint authorship requires joint responsibility; each author claiming credit for the entire work must also be aware of joint discredit. Investigators in collaborative research projects each must make reasonable and periodic inquiry as to the integrity of and processes involved in gathering and evaluating data. It should be understood that overall responsibility for the integrity of collaborative research rests with the principal investigator. Senior investigators cannot be allowed to escape the consequences of the discovery of misconduct or fraud committed under their supervision."
Regarding the professionals at the institutions of teaching the theory of gravity, I wonder how can they teach their students without having a guilty conscience that the gravitational dipole moment doesn't exist after being informed of the theory of dipole gravity. It will take a second to realize that there is a serious mistake in the books of gravitation. They should know they are lying when they teach that faulty concept in their classes. The excuse of an honest mistake, or having not been informed, no longer applies here. I think it is basically the same as academic cheating, because it is an act of knowingly misleading the students. Is this the way the scientists of today should conduct in the University where we expect the people to have the highest ethical standard?
I'm interested in the widest dissemination of the important scientific truth for the benefit of mankind. If it requires to dragging em into the court for the criminal academic misconduct, although I sincerely hope it doesn't have to go that far, I may have to consider it as an option.
Friday, August 8, 2008
Although, according to Noether’s theorem, the time translation symmetry of the Lagrangian is directly related to the conservation of energy of the system, the crucial point of the importance of the energy conservation is what is the range that the law specifically covers? Does it cover the entire universe or only the local system?
To elaborate the point of the argument, here is a suggested Gedanken experiment. For an example, suppose there is a test mass in a thermally isolated container. One decided to influence the energy of the test mass inside the container from outside and moved a heavy mass back and forth to change the gravitational force on the test mass. Following the external influence, the test mass initially set at rest started to oscillate and gained a definite kinetic energy delta E.
Of course, one will argue that the applicable range of the total energy of the system has to be extended beyond the closed container where the test mass is located. But suppose that the heavy mass outside of the container is located so far away from the test mass that the existence of the heavy mass’ external influence is not verifiable. Now one can see that the boundary of the local conservation of the energy law has to be stretched to the infinity which is the practical range of the force of gravity.
Therefore, in general, it can be stated that the local conservation of the energy law can not be respected for the long range forces. One can always try to reformulate and enforce the law but when the boundary is infinite, what is the purpose of such an enforcement? There are always possibilities that one can devise a system that the local energy is practically gained at the expense of the energy loss from somewhere else in the universe.
The mentioned influence of the external force can be initiated by manipulating the specific local configuration of the test mass, for example, by the rotation of the longitudinally asymmetric object which produces the dipole gavity effect.
After all, general relativity and Maxwell’s equation are the theories describing how the matters are interacting with each other within their own principles of interactions in the universe, and they are not about acting like a watchdog for the local conservation of the energy. The inherent nature of the long rangedness (infinity) of those forces makes the local conservation of the energy within these principles meaningless.
However, the strong force which is extermely short ranged and holds the nucleus together and also subsequently the atoms and molecules will definitely conserve the local energy as proven to be correct abundantly in the kinetic theory of gases.
Friday, July 11, 2008
The fundamental postulate of general relativity is that one can not tell the difference between the gravitational field and the uniform acceleration, which is called the equivalence principle. So according to this postulate, the gravitational field is basically the same as the source of the acceleration of the matter itself. Now, for there to be a gravitational wave, this acceleration field must be disturbed in such a way that it changes its magnitude depending on time. However, in general mechanics, the time derivative of an acceleration is not defined. That is to say, there is no da/dt, which is the time derivative of an acceleration.
If the gravitational waves were found, it means that the general equation of motion can be a third order differential equation instead of being a second order one. It breaks down the fundamental principle of Newtonian mechanics in a strange way since there is no such thing as the rate of change of the acceleration defined in the Newtonian laws of the mechanics. But then so was dipole gravity, in a different way, since an object can be physically displaced without the external force in the direction of the displacement, which occurs in the rotating hemispherical objects.
And without the detailed investigation of this effect, it was easy to dismiss dipole gravity as non existent physical entity from the start. Now with the gravitational quadrupole radiation, no one seems to pay attention on how it may violate Newtonian mechanics and the equivalence principle. For the sake of fairness, it is far more imperative to investigate dipole gravity experimentally. It won't be too late to test the quadrupole radiation effect later.
While an electric charge in circular motion around a positively charged ion loses energy by electromagnetic radiation, although the electron keeps its stable orbit around the proton due to the quantum effect, the satellite matters orbiting around the heavy condensed stars do not lose energy by radiation. Therefore, the constantly accelerating mass due to its circular motion around a host stellar object does not produce the gravitational waves.
This is the fundamental physical difference between the electrodynamics and the gravity. If the gravity is the same as the acceleration field of an object, the gravitational radiation must be a time derivative of the acceleration field itself, which is not defined in mechanics, although, this point may need more serious debate.
The energy loss observed from the fast rotating binary stars has been considered an evidence of the gravitational radiation. However, the space debris that being attracted by the two mass pole star system will see the center of mass of the two stars as the focal point of the gravitational attraction when viewed from the far distances. The impact of the debris with the two massive stars will be perpendicular to the rotational motion of the individual stars. This will create enough losses of the angular momentum and could account for the major energy loss. Therefore, this observation can not be considered an ultimate proof of the existence of the gravitational waves.
What it fundamentally suggests is that the gravitational wave may be harder to produce than one would imagine, if not impossible.
One possible application of dipole gravity may be that one can easily change the geometrical configuration of the rotating hemispherical object by using many layers of independently rotating discs or rings. This can be made to produce a longitudinal(directional) dipole gravity pulses like a pulsating beam of light which can be used to remotely pull or push objects where the pulsed dipole gravity beam may be pointed at.
Still, in this case, the pulsating beam of a directional dipole gravity is fundamentally different from the quadrupole gravitational radiation typically understood in the field of gravitation and general relativity.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Using the dipole gravity model, it is possible to catalog the entire collection of the observed galaxies by their mass, rotational speed, geometrical shape of the individual cores and the dark matter density per unit radial distance. The luminosity near the galactic center may depend on the combinations of the intrinsic parameters listed above. This is a massive project that will need to be done eventually. The differences in the minute details of the rotational velocity curve will provide the necessary information to help understanding the structure of the core of the galaxies.
The problem with the concordance model was to explain the cause of the pattern of the distribution of the dark matter and the questions of what caused it and why. Of course, within the dipole gravity model, these are few of the natural consequences of the model itself. The jets and the dark matters are made of the same material.
Friday, June 13, 2008
I was able to dig up some of the old documents related to the dipole gravity paper. Looking back, it is interesting to see how the journal referees view the content of the paper. It was revised before the submission to the other journal Physica Scripta which accepted the paper for publication, but I believe the basic point of the article was the same. This may have some historical values and one can also have a glimpse into the minds of the researchers in the field. The anonymity of the referee's name is a rule of the most of the journals and I don't think I have to reveal the name of the journal either.
So, according to these referee's report, the gravitational field in and around the rotating spherical mass was completely understood until 1997, but still we didn't have a clue on the jets and the dark matter problems. Instead, those problems were "solved" and "explained" using the theories that have nothing to do with general relativity.
The conventional gravitomagnetism, even in the weak field limit, fails to predict the fundamental mechanism of producing the repulsive gravity as one would expect a gravito"magnetism" should. The Coulomb potential analogy of the Newtonian gravity is fundamentally flawed and, moreover, it is against the equivalence principle of general relativity. A uniformly moving mass does not create a magnet like gravity, only the accelerating mass creates an additional gravity like force.
What is Dipole Gravity and What It isn’t?
Monday, June 2, 2008
The Darwinian principle of the theory of the evolution of the origin of the species and its subsequent archaeological proof left us little choice for an alternative explanation. Naturally, this has caused a great concern for the future of humanity among the philosophers in the field of anthropology. Due to the lack of the resources or the uncontrollable catastrophe, like that happened to the dinosaurs, human species will be extinct at certain point of time in the future and we have to do something about it, they theorized.
However, it must be noted that this kind of doomsday philosophy has already assumed that there are limited resources and there will be no other technology available for the change of the situation in the remote future. So when a certain scientific doctrine is used allegedly to protect the future of the human species, one can go a great distance to a morally horrifying scenario. Any theoretical attempt or plan for the global population reduction, therefore, is flawed because it was contemplated based on the wrong premises that there will be no advanced technology that will alleviate the current situation of the earth’s civilization. For a typical example, Ted Turner’s avid support for this kind of program is appalling.
Human society should spend substantial amount of time and energy on the development of this future technology and seriously think about going out of the earth’s surface to the far distant stars because the earth is not going to be the ultimate resting place for the human species. Somehow the relative location of the solar system in our galaxy makes it vulnerable to the frequent bombardment of the asteroids. And whenever it happens, the living organisms on earth suffer a great damage.
We may have to find a much stable and quiet star system inside the galaxy that all of the human species can migrate into. When people draw conclusions following the Darwinian theory of evolution, the inherent danger is there. We don’t know the full secret of the laws of the nature and what will be its possible benefits for the mankind.
What scares people especially in the field of cosmology about the theory of dipole gravity is that it deprives them of the freedom to be wrong. It must be emphasized that the scientific truth is not determined by a popular vote. Either it is correct or it is a false. What determines the ultimate fate of it is, of course, repeated experimental measurements and/or the existing observational confirmation. There are cases that a theory is partially correct. In general, in the field of science, even when a certain theory is correct, it always has a limited scope of its applicable domain. A lot of the researchers in the field already knew MOND can’t be a correct theory of the universe. However, in the absence of any alternative theory, MOND flourished because of its correct predictions of a lot of the rotational velocity curves. We enjoy and thrive in our freedom to be wrong. But like in any business decisions, being wrong means the loss of time, energy and resources.
We feel we are deprived of our freedom when a teacher came out say you can’t do those immoral things, and show proofs. We would rather stone or crucify him/her. This kind of pattern has been repeated many times in the history of mankind.
Some of the readers of the dipole gravity blog may wonder if I have received any private emails challenging the basic concept of dipole gravity. Since I have been speaking out openly regarding dipole gravity to the general public, I have received none. I openly invited for debates, but no one volunteered to come forward. I'll post any critical errors or mistakes in the presentation of dipole gravity pointed out by the readers in the blog.
One of the minor errors pointed out by one of the readers was about the location of the center of mass of a solid hemisphere. I used hemispherical shell for the dipole gravity model in the published papers, since a spherical shell was used by Lense-Thirring as a model in their calculation for the purpose of simplicity. It was a good starting point for the proof of concept.
In the case of a hemispherical shell, the center of mass is located at the point (1/2)R from the center of the full sphere. However, for a solid hemisphere, the center of mass is located at (3/8)R from the center of the full sphere. This was pointed out by one of the readers and I appreciate him for this correction. Somehow I have been assuming that the center of mass of a sold hemisphere at rest was at (1/2)R just like that of a hemisphere, which is not correct.
In the case of a fast rotating black hole, I have a serious doubt that the core of the galactic center will be spherical. It will be more or less like a two superposed funnels with long protrusions at the poles with a wider rim at the equator. The reason for this is because the equatorial plane at the rim will be bombarded by the incoming debris due to the dipole gravity force which is strong and relatively short ranged compared to the Newtonian gravity. The balance point will be achieved where the centrifugal force becomes equal to the dipole gravity plus the Newtonian gravity.
In the absence of the strong dipole gravity, a non-rotating stellar object will assume a spherical symmetry, naturally, due to the isotropic nature of the Newtonian gravity.
However, in the case where the dipole gravity is strong, the spherical symmetry will be broken and the shape of the fast rotating stellar object will assume a topology which conforms to the overall dipole gravity force lines, which is basically like a two superposed funnels attached face to face. The elongated shapes of the both of the polar axis can be anticipated due to the collision of the ejected matters and the incoming stream of particles which will eventually settle down in balance.
So, it is interesting to see how the Kerr metric for the rotating black hole has to be modified in this particular geometry, since the spherical symmetry was assumed in the original Kerr metric.
Monday, May 19, 2008
The spontaneous acceleration of the gravitational dipole moment in the matter filled universe is inconsistent with the well known laws of thermodynamics. That is, you can not create energy from nothing. Although this is a fundamental problem with dipole gravity, it must be noted that thermodynamics is valid in a closed system where the particles (molecules) that carry the energy is strictly confined within the well insulated container. The fact that dipole gravity can explain the cosmological problems of the jets and the dark matter problem prompts us to reexamine the laws of thermodynamics in light of the new long range force of gravity.
As stated previously, the hypothesis of the existence of the tachyonic particles as a medium for the gravity solves this conceptual problem. Gravity is caused by the void in space where the tachyonic particles are restricted, for example, due to the massive dense stellar material. This is not even a new idea because there has already been a speculation that gravity may be caused by pushing effect, which pushing gravity originally proposed by Le Sage. In any case, the tachyonic nature of these particles makes them easy to pass through the baryonic matter. The cross section between the neutrinos and the ordinary matter is extremely small, which means that there is no effective means of shielding gravity. The gravity, whether it's dipole or Newtonian gravity, can not be contained nor shielded. It is inherently an open system. Therefore, the conventional thermodynamics can not apply. In fact, in this picture, the energy is not created from nothing. It is merely siphoned out of the vast reservoir of the cosmic background energy due to the inherently open nature of the local gravitational system.
This is a drastic departure from the well cherished belief of the local energy conservation from the known thermodynamics. One can see the long reaching consistency here, from the mysterious nature of the negative mass squared value of the neutrinos to the observational absence of the stationary neutrinos, and its hidden effect on gravity and the elegant explanation of the dipole gravity phenomenon using the concept of the tachyonic neutrinos.
As stated in the previous posts, one can see that the major shift of the scientific paradigm is imminent.
In an interesting twist of the event, the Vatican's chief astronomer has said recently that there may be space beings who are also created by God. People may laugh at this idea. There is no mention of the aliens being created in other heavens and earths by God in the Bible. The fact that Vatican had to come up with this idea means a lot. There simply are too many evidences that something or some beings are visiting the Earth. The ultimate collapse of the Catholic Church’s doctrine of the earth being the only heaven and earth created by God must have become a serious issue to the church establishments.
Instead of letting people losing the whole faith on God, Vatican had to prepare for the upcoming revelation of the visitation of the earth by the alien beings. God created many intelligent beings following his own image in other heavens and earths. So there is nothing to panic and we can keep our faith in God as we are used to.
In fact, the freedom of information act has made it impossible to contain the incriminating evidences of the uninvited visitation of the space beings that have been accumulated over a period of decades.
Now the serious question from scientists is how could they manage to visit us if they are from millions of light years away from us?
If the conventional thermodynamics is not the full account of the laws of the nature, anything is possible. The concept that some advanced space beings may be visiting the Earth is not surprising at all.
Monday, May 12, 2008
When the dipole term in the linearized theory of general relativity was handled in the conventional way, there was an existing paradigm that precludes any possibility of the existence of the antigravity force in the universe. In fact, this concept of the repulsive gravity force has been so far out of touch of the reality of the daily lives that this very term "antigravity" has been a subject of a science fiction or a downright ridicule whoever seriously talks about it.
Even if the name of this blog is dipole antigravity, I avoided using the term as much as possible for this reason. But by all means, dipole gravity is the long range controllable antigravity force and there is no doubt about it. It is a purely mechanical means to create antigravity force which is at the core of the theory of dipole gravity. And this has been shown to be the cause of the jets and the dark matter problems. The irony of the matter is that general relativity had it since the beginning.
It is not a new theory in a sense yet profoundly new in other.
It was hidden behind the enigma of the Lense-Thirring force. The main reason this can not be understood is not because it is difficult or based on faulty logic. It is because human mind is not always logical and its inner workings depends strongly on the prevailing paradigm. It is hard to imagine explaining the cosmological problems without invoking this force.
In the world where the hunting was the main source of food supply, the agriculture would be a difficult concept to understand for people as a way of providing food source in ancient times. The biblical record of Cain and Abel may represent this kind of the turn of event. The agriculture dominated the hunting and nomadic culture.
Farming culture represented by Cain replaced the nomadic culture represented by Abel. Whether God liked it or not is not the issue. The world has profoundly changed because of this "discovery" of the concept of farming.
Would the discovery of "antigravity" have the same effect?
This is the beginning of the new civilization. The earth bound civilization is going to be replaced by the space bound civilization. The theory of dipole gravity has such a potential for huge changes and impact on our lives.
How Lense-Thirring force can be derived from dipole gravity?
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
There can be many reasons that the researchers in the field can not come forward to comment on the theory of dipole gravity. For the most part, I think there are serious liability issues. Namely, who is responsible for the waste of the billions of tax payers money on LIGO and LISA project when the test proves negative on the detection of the gravitational waves?
Even though the noise issue is a serious one at the moment, it is hard to believe that the experts in the field did not anticipate such a large magnitude of vibration compared to the possible signal. Because this analysis should have been the first step to perform before even start considering an experiment of such a gargantuan scale. You can't tell the general public, after spending billions dollars of the hard earned tax payer's money "by the way, the noise level is much greater than expected, so we can not tell if there really was gravitational wave detected or not, but there is an easy way to test general relativity, it is called "dipole gravity" proposed by Dr. Eue J Jeong". How irresponsible would that be? How stupid would that sound to the general public?
Somebody may have to go to jail. But then they will try everything to avoid such a harsh reality. One of the things they have to do would be to avoid any discussions about the theory of dipole gravity. It would be a death nail for their(misguided) project, reputation, academic prestige once it becomes a public knowledge that the more easy and direct way to test general relativity has been available and presented in the well known journal since 1999. But in fact, in the age of the World Wide Web and the wide spread of the information through Internet, people in the field already have found out the significance of dipole gravity and its far reaching consequences.
The other day, Hawking presented his recent view on cosmology in CSPAN and no one seemed to be impressed by his rendition after many revisions of his "calculations".
It must be noted that there is not a single prediction out of quantum gravity that has been verified in the laboratory. There are published papers indicating that the quantum particles do not seem to show the gravitational interaction individually which are very significant findings but never made it to the attention of the large number of the public.
Monday, April 28, 2008
The great teacher John Archibald Wheeler has passed away. His group’s legacy can be summarized by the massive rendition on the subject of general relativity in the book “Gravitation” by Kip Thorne et al. The book influenced and inspired many great minds of the modern scientific world. The following quote is his view on gravitomagnetism.
From this quote, one can see his strong conviction that there must be gravitomagnetism in the mechanical universe.
However, being a great teacher did not always go along with being a great innovator. James Maxwell was one of the examples. He is not known as being a great teacher. Maybe Albert Einstein was another one. It seems that the brain of a human being can not be both ways. Either it can be deeply innovative inside his/her soul or widely interactive with other human beings.
His long search for the true gravitomagnetism in general relativity has not resulted in the finding of dipole gravity, the true gravitomagnetism. It is tragic in a way. But this event may have been predicted by Nostradamus 500 years ago.
The reason for the persistent effort in search of the true gravitomagnetism was obviously to find a way to counteract gravity, the eternal yoke all living things have to endure. By having gravitomagnetism, we have a repulsive gravity which can negate the unstoppable pulling effect of gravity. It means the ultimate freedom of physical bodies. If we are lucky, it may also be possible to explain the so far unexplained cosmological phenomena, ie, the jets and the dark matter problems, which have been considered possible failures of general relativity in the large scale universe.
Because of the delay in the finding of the true gravitomagnetism, so far, we had many independent branches of theories to deal with this unending enigma. Finally, Wheeler’s vision of the true gravitomagnetism has been fulfilled by the theory of dipole gravity.
This is the end of the old era and the beginning of the new era in the science of gravitation.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
I can see so many graduate students and the post docs want to write thesis and research papers regarding dipole gravity in application to the various cosmological problems.
But they are afraid it may not pass the referee when they submit the paper to the journal where the major editors and referees are heavily influenced by the existing dogma. Their own advisors may not even approve of the idea in the first place.
It’s a catch 22 game. That’s why I’m trying to break the silence of the major leaders in this field. Without their (whoever they think are experts in the field) clear pro or con statement, everyone will be in the mode of a suspense.
Well, they may think to themselves, “Why should I comment on it when it is so obvious? It is correct and we obviously missed it.” “Do you have to be so sadistic enough to torture us in public?”
The problem with it is that you have no concern of the graduate students and the researches in the field, and/or the general progress of the science, any more than your own tail bone. When you have portrayed yourself as an expert in the field, it is your obligation to recognize the major development in the field and let the audience know about it because they are looking upon you for the key information regarding the new development.
It is a serious ethical issue.
You are afraid of losing the false image you have projected upon yourself as an expert in the field disintegrating in a plain sight. It is an image of a rainbow you are holding onto. It is not there anymore.
We need to move on, Dr. Kip Thorne, please speak up.
What is this theory of dipole gravity? I bet you know about it better than anyone else. You can explain it with far greater clarity than I can describe it, I’m sure.
And that’s your duty; as a communicator and interpreter of the divine secret of the nature.
Monday, March 31, 2008
If you examine the theory of dipole gravity in detail, the simplicity of its concept is so overwhelming that you realize quickly there are no possibilities of those theories of plasma and magnetic field induced jet phenomena and the MOND related cosmologies can possibly be correct. Contrary to the case at the early times of general relativity, we are facing with the fact that we have to denounce many of the previous academic results in which so much energy, time and brain have been spent. It is one of those hardest things to do in science.
General relativity interpreted in early days didn’t have to prove anyone wrong. It could easily be considered an improved version of the theory of gravity with all the salient features of the Newtonian gravity intact. So it was a relatively easy thing to take in.
Now with dipole gravity, the result will be virtually an academic tsunami. You can not rigorously present the theory without telling them their theories have been all wrong. I wish there could be an alternative easy way. A lot (thousands) of the past papers and articles related to the subject will have to be trashed overnight which has already happened except that the majority of the authors do not realize it has. People in the field have to start all over again with the new light of dipole gravity. We are at the moment of a deadly silence before the perfect storm.
I think there will be a break down point from the analysis of the GP-B probe data because there is no way they can explain away their anomalous data without using dipole gravity which is the true theory of gravitomagnetism.
If the conventional gravitomagnetism were correct, there should be a prediction of the opposite polarity of gravity from their theory. The physical implication of gravitomagentism inherently contains the meaning that there is a repulsive gravity. Did the conventional gravitomagentism predict any form of repulsive gravity? The answer is no. So one has to admit that we have been in a total darkness in regard to the phenomenon of the gravitomagnetism, the Lense-Thirring force and the acceleration induced gravity. And these are supposed to be the major part of general relativity.
In his book on “Black Holes & Time Warps”, Kip Thorne states that in his early days at Princeton, his advisor John A. Wheeler asked him to see if there is a magnetic counter part of gravity within general relativity. Of course, he couldn’t find any. He presented in his book the description of the jet phenomenon using the Blanford-Znajek process without any qualm. So one can imagine that the situation has reached the point where each of the theorists has to cover each other’s behind upon the revelation of dipole gravity. It is easy to see this because Kip Thorne kept the theory within himself knowingly that it is an earth shattering discovery that he was supposed to find out upon John A. Wheeler’s suggestion in his early days. He was about to keep it under the rug and brush it off as long as he possibly can. How about the average graduate students and the researchers in the field who have to suffer because of this kind of willful deceit to the scientific community as a leader in the field? Does he care?
They are more interested in protecting each other’s personal dignity than the promulgation of the truth in science. I don’t think this is a true honest and honorable attitude of a scientist. History will judge them dearly.
Send him this article by email and request him for an open explanation.
Friday, March 28, 2008
If you say “theory” people normally become immediately skeptical about it thinking “ok, what kind of unlikely assumption is proposed in there?” MOND (Modified Newtonian Dynamics) is certainly a “theory” which is riddled with unthinkable contradictions, like non conserving energy and momentum without a justifiable reason. Whenever I mention about the theory of dipole gravity, this is a kind of a general reaction. There are so many shaky theories that are unverified, untested, circling around in the field of physics that sometimes it is hard to tell which are the correct theory and which isn’t. First of all, the theory of black hole will never be tested by experiment so it will remain as a “theory” as long as it exists.
What we have learned in the Classical Mechanics is that we can predict what is going to happen to the bodies of the celestial object when they are influenced by the law of Newtonian gravity. Detailed calculation is hardly necessary to understand the properties of the fundamental trajectory, for example; either if it is an elliptical orbit or a parabolic one.
The principle is basically the same with dipole gravity. You can predict many features of the motion of the celestial bodies without resort to a detailed calculation. The fundamental gravity force lines are the ones that the cosmic objects will follow in their orbit or the passages that are running perpendicular to it. From this observation, the presence of the dark matter halo becomes self evident around the fast rotating ultra compact stellar objects as well as the jets. The visibility issue is only a matter of considering if there will be enough collisions among the debris specifically for the case of the jets, and if there is going to be long enough time for them to coagulate and proceed to the thermonuclear synthesis for the generation of heat and energy as in the case of the stars.
Unfortunately it took nine years after the publication of dipole gravity to realize that the Lense-Thirring force had the wrong sign. Without this finding, there would have been no consistent understanding of the jets and the dark matter problem within general relativity. Dipole gravity is not a theory as one would normally think of a “theory”. It is a self evident general relativity. The fact that it took so long to find the solution doesn’t mean that it had to be a horrendously difficult problem. On the contrary, it was an exceedingly simple solution when the right concept was applied.
This is the reason the experts in the field refuse talking about it. You can not talk about it while being known as a renowned expert in the field of cosmology and general relativity, because if you do, it will be tantamount to an admission of a total incompetence.
Is it my fault to make them feel incompetent? Of course not.
I don’t think anyone will tell them to quit their job for being incompetent. It is purely a human factor of arrogance and pretentiousness that prevents them from coming forward. After all we are all human beings that are fallible and susceptible to error.
I don’t think I’m infallible either. I fixed the sign of the Lense-Thirring force in the 1999 paper to make it match with the known form. It could have been considered a form of an academic dishonesty in a way. I should not have followed the errors of the previous researchers. But I came forward to announce that it was an error despite its general acceptance in the physics community for the last 90 years without any contest, after a careful scrutiny of the various problems of cosmology. It was not an easy conclusion to draw, because it has passed the test of the numerous physicists and the brightest minds. So unless you're absolutely sure, no one will make such a drastic claim. But I'm hundred percent positive about this claim, "Lense-Thirring force has the wrong sign".
What matters is not what others think or regard of yourself. What really matters is “what is the real truth of the nature?” Any theory in physics or science or any field of study for that matter can be challenged, modified or/and improved.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
If you are a professor in an academic institution, you can not afford not to learn the theory of dipole gravity. It's time to revise and rewrite your 20 year old note books on mechanics and the theory of gravitation that you have been teaching in the class over and over again. Physics at the present time is not a sole trademark of a few individuals like at the time of Galileo.
The nations of the world have prominent physicists and scientists with their own independent thoughts and capabilities of judgement to realize what is the significance of dipole gravity. This kind of activity is called in the medical field as "continued education", to accommodate the newly discovered medical facts and important discoveries for the cure of human disease conditions.
The lack of the progress and understanding of the mechanics of the nature is a disease condition in the field of science so to speak.
I realized that contrary to the thinking of many graduate/undergraduate students, the professors in the field of cosmology and gravitation or any field of science can be as ignorant as the students themselves in certain areas of expertise. This is a simple fact. If you haven't been taught by others or by yourself, there is no way you can learn about any new field of science.
One of the fastest way to learn dipole gravity is to exercise the derivation of the Lense-Thirring force using the two opposite dipole gravity potential by taking a gradient of them. This exercise includes the derivation of the relativistic shift of the center of mass from the rotating hemisphere.
One can solve so many problems in cosmology just using the conventional Newtonian potential plus dipole gravity. And you don't have to go through the details of general relativity to learn so many important aspects of cosmology.
So, it would be appropriate to include dipole gravity at least in the text books of the classical mechanics of the graduate courses if not in the undergraduate ones.
You will learn eventually that general relativity was actually meant to find dipole gravity. The reason is because there is not much testable cosmological problems beyond the second order effect of general relativity. Although it may be considered that general relativity has been tested in many different venues, as you may read from the NASA article on "In Search of Gravitomagnetism", which is considered the key to the solution of general relativity, the true nature of the general relativistic gravitomagnetism has never been known. The so called conventional "gravitomagentism" and its prediction for the amount of the precession of the gyro were derived from the modified Maxwell's equation, which is not the correct theory of gravitation. To be more specific, the conventional gravitomagnetism has never succeeded in deriving the Lense-Thirring force or any forms close to it.
The fundamental irony of this exploration is that general relativity was much bigger than Einstein could imagine of it himself. But then Newton was totally engaged himself in alchemy in his later years as well. After all, we are all gullible to our own idiosyncrasies.
The main problem with the conventional gravitomagnetism is not knowing which side of the rotating ring becomes the attractive gravity pole and which side the repulsive one. Unless one assumes that the copious amount of positrons (just as many as the number of the electrons) can be created by some miraculous way at the core of the accretion discs, there is no way one can explain the symmetric jets using the Penrose mechanism.
It's like people built houses on a sand dune when they used the conventional gravitomagnetism for the explanation of the jets. This should be a lesson for the future theorists in the field of science.
Monday, March 17, 2008
I think I have done enough of an introduction for the theory of dipole gravity so far. I would rather think of it like an effective method of presenting at a department seminar or a colloquium, which is open to the general public as well, without having to visit the individual universities. However, there is nothing barely new in this blog beyond the two papers published in 1997 and 1999 which have basically all the necessary information to make a good starting point, although those papers may not have been clear and obvious enough to make a bold statement like “the Lense-Thirring force has wrong sign”.
If you find something that you have been looking for a long time and ultimately gave up on any attempt finding it, you will be in disbelief once you see it in front of your eyes. People will shake their heads in total disbelief saying, “Nah, it can’t be”. This has been the situation with dipole gravity.
Since I could be blamed for my inactivity on the theory of dipole gravity after its publication (as people normally send copies of preprints to their colleagues), I guess I need to explain what I was doing in the mean time of nine years. Why did I not actively promote the theory in 1999 if I had such a strong belief about it? First of all, I thought that was already an exciting discovery that anyone would eager to pick it up and publish tons of papers by expanding and applying it to the various cosmological problems. Was I naïve? Those papers were uploaded in the LLNL archives so that they can be plainly visible to everybody anyways.
One of the writers of the scientific story once said there will be only a handful of people who can truly understand the theory of dipole gravity in the world. And the ones who truly understand it are not willing to talk about it. What a shame! She can write a story only when someone else either agrees, disagrees or throws questions on it. It’s like a black pit hole of information. A bunch of information goes in and being processed but no result comes out.
After the publication of the two papers and discussing them briefly in the internet, I received emails from all over the world, regarding the exciting experiments that have been performed and demonstrated in front of the public. I thought that this could be an elaborate hoax.
One of the many of the information was about the inventor Thomas Henry Moray who was active in invention of the energy device in Utah in 1930s. He allegedly succeeded in making a device that can generate 50 kW of electricity out of thin air for 157 hours. I was extremely intrigued by the proposition. The main reason that I received this kind of email letter was because the theory of dipole gravity predicts the possibility of extracting energy from space as well. I later noticed that there are tons of inventors involved in this exciting project behind the scene.
I was about to find out if this is an elaborate hoax or a legitimate physics. You can imagine how I ended up forgetting about promoting the theory of dipole gravity. Dipole gravity is an exciting concept as well, but as a method of producing energy, it is bulky and cumbersome. If the story provided to me were true, we have a huge chunk of physics missing, undiscovered and untouched which can potentially revolutionize our civilization overnight. After all, if dipole gravity has proved it is possible to extract energy from space, why not by a method of electricity and magnetism? It would be much simpler and elegant if indeed it is possible.
We are about to enter the realm of a virtual “25th century science” so I advise the readers to hold tightly on to their seats. Enter
Saturday, March 8, 2008
In a recent communication with a prominent astrophysicist, I noticed that there is a general misconception about the theory of dipole gravity. Somehow people seem to think dipole gravity is some kind of a modification of general relativity.
This is far from the truth. Dipole gravity is not a modification of general relativity. Although it may sound bizarre, the general relativistic gravitational field both the inside and out of a rotating spherical source has never been fully worked out. In Newtonian gravity, the gravitational field inside a spherical shell is zero. However, due to the equivalence principle, general relativity predicts that there will be an induced gravity field due the constant acceleration of the mass resulted by the rotational motion of the object.
Because of the enormous complexity of the integral calculation, the only known solution to this problem was available only at the close distance from the center of the sphere which has been worked out by Lense and Thirring in 1918. In their original paper, they found the general relativistic gravity force close to the center of the rotating spherical shell which was given by,
These forces have been known as Lense-Thirring force. The x and y component of the force shows the radially outgoing structure which has contributed to the notion that it is a manifestation of the centrifugal force in accordance with Mach’s principle.
However, the presence of the attractive harmonic z component of the force was enigmatic from the beginning. There are historical records showing that Thirring had correspondences with Einstein in several occasions regarding this problem. Obviously, it baffled Thirring as much as Einstein.
It must be emphasized that the above expression is valid only for small x, y, z which is very close to the center of the rotating spherical shell. In other areas beyond the center of the sphere, the integral calculation is simply impossible. This form of the force ceases to have any meaning as soon as the distance from the center increases beyond the closest proximity. And the known solution to the linearized theory of general relativity has stated that the rotating spherical mass does not have a meaningful dipole term, which is true only in the very far distances. So this problem has been left out as an open question in general relativity since its birth.
The conventionally known "gravitomagnetism", which is a modified version of Maxwell's equation, was one of the desperate attempts to understand the extension of the Lense-Thirring force and the acceleration induced gravity effect beyond the limit of the proximity to the center of the rotating source. Needless to say, there is no mention of the derivation of the Lense-Thirring force or any form close to it, from this formulation at the distance close to the center of the sphere.
There simply was no known general relativistic solution in the intermediate area away from the center to the relatively close distance from the surface of the rotating spherical source.
This means that the general relativistic gravity field induced by the rotational motion of a spherical object has never been fully understood to include the entire space beyond the close proximity to the center.
What the theory of dipole gravity has accomplished is that it calculated and showed the compact mathematical form describing all the details of the field inside and out of the rotating spherical source. This was achieved by dividing the sphere into two sectors of the hemispheres, and by calculating the fields individually and adding them together, which is possible because the potential function is a scalar quantity.
The field close to the center calculated from this method produced the Lense-Thirring force of the form,
Several points can be noticed.
1. Both forms have the same sign correlations, eg, the radial and the axial component of the forces have the opposite sign with respect to each other.
2. They have the equal functional form as second order differential equations.
3. There is a uniform difference of a constant factor 2/15 between the two expressions.
4. The form derived from dipole gravity has the missing velocity dependent component of the force.
In the theory of dipole gravity, it has been specifically pointed out that only the diagonal component of the metric tensor is considered. The velocity dependent force can be added later without the loss of generality.
The difference of the constant factor by 2/15 may be explained by considering the fact that the center of the sphere is close to the centers of the two separate hemispheres. The centers of the two hemispheres are singularity points where the dipole field becomes infinity(which is a mathematical artifact) and the field close to the center of the hemispheres within the range of R/2 will not be accurate(larger than actually it is), which explains the discrepancy. This problem can easily be fixed by introducing a form factor etha.
Now, the total potential without singularity can be written
However, this was not the end of the story. The further surprising irony was that the signs of the Lense-Thirring forces are all reversed as later found out. Once the Lense-Thirring force is identified as the residual force from the two oppositely superposed long ranged dipole fields within the rotating spherical shell, the continuity of the force lines all around the space becomes an important issue.
Since we are aware of the jets and the dark matter problems in cosmology, the conventionally known signs of the Lense-Thirring force become very problematic. The repulsive radial force is not consistent with the dark matter problem any more than the attractive axial component of the force with the jets. Dark matter problems will be solved easily if the radial component of the force were attractive and the jets would be explained easily if the axial component of the force were repulsive.
In fact, the original formulation from dipole gravity showed the reversed signs for the Lense-Thirring force. However, since there was no compelling reason to doubt the correctness of the signs of the 90 year old formula, before applying the force to the actual cosmological problems, the result was simply adjusted to conform to the known results. Even the jet problem seemed all right with the original signs of Lense-Thirring configuration.
It was only with the dark matter problems that the signs of the Lense-Thirring force looked awfully awkward. One can not have the accretion phenomenon with the repulsive radial force, let alone the fast rotating spiral form of the galaxy. And the jet phenomenon seemed more easily explainable with the corrected signs of the Lense-Thirring force.
The necessary presence of the dark matter halo which is an absolute requirement for the explanation of the flat rotation curves within dipole gravity and also in dark matter hypothesis was the final nail on the coffin of the original signs of the Lense-Thirring force. It simply can’t be the other way around. The matters ejected by the jets have to come back to the equatorial plane and eventually to the galactic center to be recycled. The force lines depicted by the corrected Lense-Thirring force matched perfectly with this picture. If the original signs of the Lense-Thirring force were correct, matters will be ejected radially from the equatorial center to the plane and come back to the both poles which is against all odds.
More specifically, if this is the case, since the direction of the dipole gravity force lines and the Newtonian gravity force lines are in the same direction at the both poles, that are attractive, there will be no jets visible, because the accompanying two forces lines do not allow the debris to collide among themselves.
The dark matters are basically the debris in space in transit following this dipole gravity force lines.
Einstein was inspired by Mach's view of the universe and of the origin of the centrifugal force when he formalized general relativity. Naturally he expected that his theory of gravity should reflect Mach's point of view. The Lense-Thirring force was at the right spot and at the right moment. In his mind and that of Lense-Thirring's, there was no doubt that the force they derived from the second order effect of gravity was the manifestation and proof of Mach's principle. But how many times in the history of physics, people are inspired by something and discover something else totally new. But in general, I think, there is a general tendency of a bias when people strongly expect something to come out of their research activities.
Now, it is clear that the total general relativistic gravity field including the Newtonian gravity can be written
for a rotating hemispherical source. In a multiply connected dipole configuration, the second term will be represented by sums of all the existing dipoles in the system. For an example, the dipole field from a rotating sphere has to be a sum of the two oppositely connected dipoles within the source.
Any cosmological problems involving a rotating source will need this formulation to accurately describe the mechanics of the system just like we use Newtonian gravity to describe the non-rotating(very slowly rotating) stellar configurations.
It is not surprising at all that one has to make all kinds of extra assumptions to account for the baffling problems in cosmology, when this second order dipole gravity term was not present, even to the degree that the whole Newtonian mechanics has to be modified, let alone the plasma and the magnetic field for the jet phenomenon.
The correct order of the approach to solve the problem would be to apply this dipole gravity for the jets and the dark matter problems first and if it still doesn't work then use any additional tools to account for the further minute details.
In this regards, I noticed that the GPB data have been processed using the theoretical results derived from the conventional gravitomagnetism which is a wrong theory of gravity. The dipole gravity has the entirely different topological property compared to the theory derived from the modified Maxwell's equation. A rotating spherical mass has four distinctive poles instead of the two according to the dipole solution of general relativity. So, if the GPB data don't fit the predictions, they have to suspect that it may not be because of the systematic experimental error but because of the incorrect theoretical assumptions.
I'm sure this is not the end of cosmology. I hope dipole gravity can inspire young minds and help them discover something much bigger than the surface it barely scratched. I also hope it becomes the beginning of the new era of the engineering of this new scientific concept for the future space adventure of the mankind.
What has inspired the whole concept of dipole gravity?
Monday, March 3, 2008
We have seen how the world of physics has changed suddenly in the early 20th century with the development of quantum mechanics and general relativity. In this process, we saw how Einstein played the major role even in the development of the quantum theory although he remained skeptical of the quantum mechanics. His willing acceptance of the radical concept by De Brogli prompted Schrodinger's equation which accelerated the development of quantum mechanics.
However, we are living in a world of much different than the early 20th century in a way much less flattering.
I think scientific research is like a job of a lonely artist. Even if people do not understand what you are doing, you have no choice but to keep on doing what you have been doing. The difference between the art and the science is that an ideal model of beauty represents the goal of an artist, while the ideal model of a grand logical consistency becomes the goal of a scientific research.
But it seems that we are living in a society where the fundamental science is in a total disregard of the rational approach. I think this may only mean that we are up against the brick wall for the next breakthrough in science. The field of cosmology has gone awry for a long time that the King's invisible cloth has become literally very beautiful. For an example, beyond the concept of dipole gravity that has been discussed extensively in this blog, I don't see why people can not overcome the barrier of the speed of the light limit. It was meant to be applied only for material particles. The meaning of the limit of the speed of light vanishes as soon as we are talking about the outside of the light cone particles.
There are more than a dozen of reasons that the neutrinos must be tachyons. On the other hand, there is only a couple of reasons that the neutrinos can not be tachyons.
Namely, "nothing can travel faster than the speed of light". And "quantum theory works without the tachyonic particles". In fact, the necessity of the renormalization in quantum theory should have been considered its fundamental logical deficiency.
However, it is obvious that the first reason is not even a valid one. It is merely an unsubstantiated unscientific dogma. All the experimental data so far have proven in favor of the fact that neutrinos must be tachyons.
In fact, what special relativity has shown us is that because of the difference in Galileo transformation (first order differential equation in time) and the inertial transformation of the Maxwell's(second order differential equation in time), in the process of unifying the transformation via Lorentz's scheme, the unexpected discovery has been made. That is the possible presence of the entirely different world of the faster than the speed of light travel by the tachyonic particles.
The speed of light barrier has merely played the role of a parametric boundary between the two entirely different physical worlds.
The economy created by this concept is enormous. It is mechanically transparent that these tachyonic particles are the original cause of the gravity as well as the quantum mechanics. The quantum mechanical uncertainly is due to this random nature of the background tachyonic particles hitting on quantum objects like electrons via the electroweak interaction which must be longer ranged and stronger than the elastic collision cross section, which may explain the enormous scale difference between the Plank constant and the gravitational constant. Since we have the same number density and the average speed of travel by the background tachyonic particles, what determines the strength of the Planck constant and the gravitational constant is the respective interaction cross sections. The unification of gravity and quantum theory is achieved by this mechanical concept not by a trick of a Lagrangian.
In a simple tachyonic mechanics exercise, one can calculate the result of a head on (billiard ball like) collision between an electron and a tachyonic particle. In this process, the tachyonic neutrinos lose energy but gains speed after the collision. And consequently the quantum electrons gain energy and speed. However, due to the random isotropic distribution of the background particles and their collisions, the average position and the speed of the quantum object remain unchanged yet the actual position and the speed will never be known. The probabilistic nature of the quantum theory comes out naturally from this picture.
The bounced off tachyons from the heavy matter creates Gaussian density distribution of a relative void of tachyonic neutrinos. The tachyonic vacuum is equivalent to a gravity center like a balloon in the air filled room tends to move toward the low pressured region. So the universe is filled with this low energy but much faster than the speed of light particle known as neutrinos which determines how the matter particles should behave in the universe. These low energy tachyonic neutrinos will have a very low(almost zero) inelastic cross section with the material particles.
So, not only they are not visible, but also they are not detectable.
The hadronic particles will have much higher elastic cross section with the tachyonic particles which contributes to their heavier mass.
Until we see clearly the King's invisible cloth is not there, there will be no progress of science in our life time.
Monday, February 25, 2008
One of the well known astrophysicists has stated that the theory of dipole gravity is confusing when it comes to the explanation of the relativistic jets. The theory itself is not difficult but what makes it confusing may be that the same terminology and similar concept has to be used to explain the mechanisms of the theory. One can not build a new house without demolishing the ragged old one at the same place. Largely this is in the minds of the people in the field than the actual physical construction. So, here is a more concise description of what it is.
The fundamental difference between the theory of dipole gravity and other astrophysical theories of the relativistic jets(plasma and magnetic field caused), MOND and the dark matter hypothesis is that, dipole gravity is a theory derived from the first principle. In fact, the jets and dark matter problem were not in immediate consideration when the theory of dipole gravity was conceived. Of course, the reason behind the perception of the need for such a theory has been constantly in the back ground because of the inadequacies of the physical mechanisms behind those theories.
It all started from the fundamental physical anomaly observed from the simple mechanical system of the rotating hemisphere when special relativity was incorporated into the calculation of the center of mass. Consider this, why and how the center of mass of a hemisphere changes when it is in rotational motion even when there is no external force(in the direction of the shift) applied to it. And why this is not the case for the rotating sphere?
Newtonian mechanics states that an object should be at rest unless an external force is applied in the direction of the motion. Being at rest by definition means that the effective center of mass is in the same position relative to the entire distribution of the matter in the universe.
If the mass increase effect of special relativity is the real physical phenomenon and not some kind of an illusion, one can not avoid this anomaly of the center of mass shift from a rotating hemispherical system. It is a very real physical effect and it fundamentally challenges the conventionally known mechanics. It can mean many things. The rotating hemisphere(longitudinal axially asymmetric object) somehow may experience an external force which causes the shift of the center of mass. But the fundamental mystery of this system is that the shift of the center of mass moves along with the object itself. So it is possible that the system may be in a perpetual mode of acceleration.
Not surprisingly, it didn't take long to find out that the same mechanical system has been totally neglected in general relativity as well. The hitherto abandoned dipole term in the linearized theory of general relativity starts to have the real meaning because such a shift can not be transformed away. It is a real physical effect that depends on the energy in the system.
If we have a dipole gravitational moment in the two mass pole model universe, it will certainly be in a perpetual mode of acceleration until it reaches to one of the poles. The paper basically describes the effect of this force, but the real point of the paper was that it has justified the reality of the dipole gravitational moment which is the source of the additional long range gravity force which we have been missing in the entire history of mankind.
Now it is natural that we have to apply this fundamental force derived from the first principle to the hitherto unsolved(satisfactorily) cosmological problems. First of all, according to the dipole gravity potential from a rotating spherical object, the jets from the rotating black holes or neutron stars are totally natural and not surprising at all.
During the process of the application of dipole gravity to the dark matter problem, it has become clear that the sign of the Lense-Thirring force can not be consistent with the accretion phenomenon because the radial component of the Lense-Thirring force is repulsive(outgoing). The accretion and the jets can not be separated, and when the signs of Lense-Thirring force are corrected, everything(jets, accretions and flat rotation curves) starts to make perfect sense. The point source nature of the jets basically creates the 1/r dependent dark matter density distribution which is required to explain the flat rotational velocity curves.
So, the real physical nature of the dark matter is that it is a group of a constantly moving debris(pretty much like comets and asteroids) in the spiral galaxy following the dipole gravity force lines(from the poles to the equatorial center) that resembles the two superposed gravitomagnets around the rotating ultra compact stellar object. Since the dipole gravity force line is divergent at the poles and around the galactic sphere until they come together at the central accretion plane, the ejected matters can not be visible while they are in transit until they reach the rotational plane where the massive collisions among the debris occurs and generates visible radiation. Therefore, the luminosity close to the galactic nuclei may represent the strength of the jets and the density of the matters being recycled and this could be used as a valid parameter for the prediction of the flat rotation curves as they did in MOND.
In fact, the sources of the asteroids that bombarded the planets which left so many scars on their surfaces in the solar system can be explained if we assume that this kind of dark matters are pervasive in our galaxy as well.
Self Evident Dipole Gravity