## Tuesday, September 21, 2010

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why have the early investigators missed the dipole gravity?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

## Wednesday, August 25, 2010

### Tachyonic Kinematics

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

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

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

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

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

## Sunday, August 15, 2010

### Interesting Comment of Nikola Tesla and Dipole Gravity

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

Nikola Tesla

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

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

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

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

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

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

This was how the second order "mathematical term" of general relativity was treated and eliminated in the earlier solution of general relativity. Of course, no doubt Einstein agreed to this conclusion. I emphasized the "mathematical" because I'm here trying to invoke the ghostly specter of the
"mathematics" in direct contrast to Nikola Tesla's early observation.

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

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

Mathematics !!!!

Why it can't be overlooked.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Please notice that it was in "MATHEMATICS".

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

## Sunday, August 8, 2010

### The Truth of the Conventional Gravitomagnetism

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

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

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

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

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

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

What kind of arrogance is that?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

## Friday, July 16, 2010

### Revisit the Old Question of The Energy of The Electric Field

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

## Sunday, June 20, 2010

### Is the Capacitor Anomaly a Case of Zeno's Paradox?

It is possible that some of the physicists who can not dispute the validity of the capacitor anomaly may think that this is just another similar case of Zeno's paradox.

Such an attitude can be summarized by the following. "I can't disprove it, but I know it can't be true" kind of line of justification which can not really be a logical thinking. "But if it is true, it is entirely over my head". Hence, the chain of the rational mind stops working entirely.

This kind of similar situation happens when you discuss the religion of Islam with a Muslim. As soon as you get to the point where you have to seriously challenge the authority of the religious leader of Islam, the discussion ends abruptly because you can not go any further unless he/she has to disavow his/her religion.

What is remarkable about the science is that we have the tool known as mathematics that can prove or disprove a line of a statement on a certain quantitative phenomenon without a shadow of doubt.

For a reminder, Zeno's paradox runs like in the following hypothetical problem.

A runner wants to run a certain distance - let us say 100 meters - in a finite time. But to reach the 100-meter mark, the runner must first reach the 50-meter mark, and to reach that, the runner must first run 25 meters. But to do that, he or she must first run 12.5 meters.

Since space is infinitely divisible, we can repeat these 'requirements' forever. Thus the runner has to reach an infinite number of 'midpoints' in a finite time. This is impossible, so the runner can never reach his goal. In general, anyone who wants to move from one point to another must meet these requirements, and so motion is impossible, and what we perceive as motion is merely an illusion.

Where does the argument break down? Why?
And also, where is the mathematical proof on this?

Now, let's examine the physical nature of the capacitor anomaly. The physical mechanism of the capacitor anomaly can be explained more clearly by the following physical observation(s).

The force lines that define the conventional energy stored in the concentric spherical capacitor are radial which means they are coming out of the center of the concentric spheres. On the other hand, the force lines that define the repulsive self energy is tangential to the sphere's surface.

This means that the force lines from the attractive electrostatic potential energy and the force lines from the repulsive electrostatic potential energy are "orthogonal" to each other. This indicates that the two types of the energy can not be mixed together.

The proof of the orthogonality between the two independent vector quantities is an excellent mathematical argument on the separate nature of the two seemingly related yet mysterious vector quantities in physics.

One can draw a spherical Gauss plane in between the two concentric spherical shell to calculated the field in between the shells, but then one can also draw a Gauss plane cut across in half of the inner sphere and there will still be net charges inside the Gauss plane which represents the source inside the Gauss plane. This proves that there IS electric field within the conducting metal which was totally neglected in the conventional theory of Electricity and Magnetism.

Of course, this means that the conventionally known energy (1/2)*Q^2/c in the capacitor does not include the repulsive self energy from each of the spherical shells.

Also, I tend to isolate the discussion of the space energy extraction using the gravitational dipole moment as I discussed in my other papers from that of the capacitor anomaly. However, once you add these two phenomena together, the case of the space energy extraction becomes an indisputable scientific fact, making the law of the local energy conservation a serious scientific misidentification.

I like the expression, "INDISCRIMINATE, OVER GENERALIZATION" of a principle obtained from one specific branch of physics (Thermodynamics) to all other more advanced branches of physics (theory of Electricity and Magnetism, General relativity) without serious investigation.

## Saturday, June 5, 2010

### Knowledge of the Garden of Eden. What is Good and What is Evil?

This is a very old philosophical question that has been asked and answered in the book "Republic" written by Plato. In his long deductive argument, it boils down to the following point, "Is it possible for a pure evil to sustain its own existence?".

If the deception, dishonesty and the self sabotage are the characteristics of the evil, how evil itself can stand by its own, because the evil entity will be divided and fight among themselves until the whole system of the evil falls apart. So, ultimately the evil is an unsustainable entity that can not exist by its own and that's why it is evil.

This was the essential core of the Plato's argument. The life of evil, if it can ever exist, is ephemeral. Even for an instant moment of existence, it needs a certain amount of virtue borrowed from the "Goodness". So, in human society, it is possible for evil to sustain a certain amount of time due to the following reasons.

It is the principle of self preservation based on the premises of the LIMITED RESOURCES.

If you examine the movie "God Father" closely, at certain point, you will gasp, after a while imagining how could such an evil entity can stay alive in the first place. However, you realize that the only mode of the justification for their evil activity in that setting is the survival. The survival is the justification for any action within the premises of the whole group. But as you see there are as powerful enemy in their neighborhood threatening their existence, and their life is always in danger. There is no genuine peace in the whole group of the mafia other than the facade of festivity. The movie shows you the picture of the joyous party where women are dancing and children are happy in the surroundings. It is a surreal picture of the gruesome aspect of this type of environment where mafia is freely roaming within the society.

Let's assume that there is a society where people's life is not threatened by the lack of the resources. You don't have to go to the street for begging by being unemployed. The life and death situation by being out of your job is not there. Your minimum and beyond of the resources are provided for free. I'm not dreaming here about the conventional wisdom of the communism.

If the energy resource for every body is infinitely available, what will be the people's obsession toward the next.

There is no justification for deception and self sabotage. People will be able to see through other's evil intent very quickly. Any kind of deception will be caught. Any wrong doings of the people will not be unnoticed. It will be a transparent society. There is very little purpose that the corporation will extort people for the benefit of the profit.

The prevalent mode of the operation of the society in such world will be peace and tranquility and mostly in helping and improving the lives of the fellow human beings.

Most of the petty crimes in this world is from the necessity of the survival which can't really be categorized as crime because every one else in this world is in the same ultimate fight for the survival. The only difference is who is in the side of the political right. So, the political corruption will be rampant in such a society to have an edge over the rest of the competitors. The drug makers will do everything to make sure their drugs will sell regardless of the knowledge that there could be much cheaper and safer alternative medicine in the world. They could go so far as to actively suppress such information because it may danger their pharmaceutical business. The oil company will on the other hand may have vested interest in suppressing the information that may danger their oil and gasoline related enterprise. The only losing party is the consumer at the cost of all of their labors to enrich the big businesses.

How can all these be reversed?

I think the answer is in the development of the tachyonic energy source. And ultimately the revision of our entire physics text books away from the unfit law of energy conservation which was not very well defined in the first place. The reason for this has been explained many times but here it goes again, how the law of the energy conservation can be defined when the container is fundamentally leaky? The air tight plastics, stainless steel and glass are all leaky for the magnetic field as well as for the general electromagnetic fields. Now, in this situation, what is the meaning of the energy conservation? The range of the influence of the electromagnetic field is infinite. So, how do you define the energy conservation? What is the limited volume of this energy to perfectly prove that the energy is conserved? You can't define the infinite volume for the energy container. Therefore, you can not define the energy conservation for the electromagnetic field and its energy content rigorously.

If the electric capacitors can accumulate more energy than the energy needed to charge them, as proved in the physical theory of the tachyonic energy device, why are we struggling with the lack of the energy source?

Why should the US worry about the national debt or that of any nations for that matter? Why anyone has to go sleep cold in the winter of the night? Why anyone should be thirsty for the lack of the clean water? Why the crops should go dry when there is not enough rain. The limitless energy can be used to desalinate the sea water and pump it to irrigate all the farms for free in all the nations of the world.

You can't make the device for free certainly but the energy itself is free just like the air we breath is free. What is the point of all these argument about the off shore drilling, alternative energy, etc?

The energy is free for all of us humans to use for the eons. If there is anything that prevents this from being achieved, I would call it the evilest force in the universe no matter what may be involved in their agenda.

This information has been sent personally to the US energy secretary and the Nobel physics laureate Paul Chu, the disclosure project proponent Steven Greer, the self proclaimed physicist and the project Camelot contributor George Green, the author of the book "The Coming Energy Revolution" Jeane Manning, the fierce whistle blower of the NASA's Cobe Experiment fraud, Bibhas De and my beloved Ph.D physicist friends who can not dispute the physical truth of the capacitor anomaly.

Where are they? And what are their priorities of life in this urgent time of crisis of humanity in the history of mankind?

## Thursday, June 3, 2010

### There is No Energy Crisis in The World

The gulf oil leak crisis may be a good opportunity that the humanity must consider the permanent alternative energy solution seriously. In my published video "Physics of Free Energy Device" in the Youtube, I have shown why there is unlimited energy in the space for us to tap and use freely. The fundamental principle of how to extract this energy is also presented in the video. The problems of the conventionally known alternative energy sources of solar, wind, ethanol, geothermal energy etc are in the fact that they are all limited in one way or another due to their own peculiar mode of the limited energy source.

The tachyonic energy source is unlimited, easy to tap and environmentally clean. I call it the "tachyonic energy" because the particles that carry this energy are tachyons. People have been using the concept of "zero point energy" for a long time. The concept of zero point energy came from the idea of the quantized harmonic oscillator. There is a vibration of the quantum particles in the amount of energy corresponding to the half of the integer of the frequency, E= 1/2 hf. The physical meaning of this is that there is no absolute rest state for the quantum particles. The quantum particles must have the 1/2 hf of energy even at the absolute temperature of -273.15 degree Celsius. Somethings or some particles in the space are making these particles restless.

However, quantum mechanics is fundamentally a probabilistic theory, and as such it does not describe the exact physical mechanism and/or the mode of the presence of such background particles. It is like assuming I know there is energy in the space but I don't know exactly where that is. This doesn't help us to utilize such energy.
While mysterious, this can be explained by using the alternative and more intuitive physical principle, and that is, the vacuum of the space is not exactly a vacuum. The space is full of tachyonic particles called neutrinos. The physical presence of neutrinos has been known in physics for a long time but humanity is still struggling to understand what this particle neutrinos are. In my LLNL archive paper "Neutrinos Must be Tachyons", I explained why that must be the case, in full field theoretical presentation. The physics community still has no consensus on exactly what is the mass of the neutrinos. And without the consensus on their important property, there can be no progress of science on how to use them for our benefit. That is out of the question.

But then why anybody should wait until they make up their mind when the evidence is so overwhelming. You just go ahead to investigate what might be its physical ramifications. The followings are the conclusions that I have come across while investigating the properties of the neutrinos.

The tachyonic neutrinos are the fundamental cause of the quantum mechanical uncertainty, at the same time being the carriers of the light.

Then how can we use the energy of these particles? The secret was hidden in the capacitor anomaly I presented in the video. What the theory of capacitor anomaly says is that there is always more energy than the energy required to charge a capacitor. And the excess energy is hidden in the form of the repulsive electrostatic potential energy which is elusive because it requires a special device and electronic circuit to make its energy to materialize into a useful form.

In fact, numerous inventors in the past have already accomplished this miraculous feat and the records are abundant throughout the web.

One of the philosophical as well as the physical question is how this tachyonic particle's energy can be extracted as such particles are not interacting with the material physical particles at all. On the contrary, according to the Standard Electroweak Theory of the leptons, developed by Abdus Salam, Sheldon Glashow and Steven Weinberg and also E.C.G. Sudarshan, which unified the electromagnetic force with the weak force, the weakly interacting neutrinos are not totally free from the electromagnetic interactions.

The weak and the electromagnetic interactions are coupled to each other which has been proved to be correct within the Standard Model of the Leptons. They are not independent forces. In other words, neutrinos can get caught or delayed in its motion in one way or another by the electrons in the space. In the process of being caught or most likely being delayed, the tachyonic neutrinos can lose its kinetic energy. The important clue here is that the electron can be used as the energy extracting agent because of its property of interacting with the tachyonic neutrinos and also its extremely high mobility.

The fundamental physical reason that the neutrinos can interact with electrons at all may be in the fact that the neutrinos are magnetic monopoles. It is also noted that the tachyonic magnetic monopole neutrinos can be a perfect medium that can transmit the electromagnetic waves through the space. So, the weak interaction seems to be a secondary result coming from the magnetic property of the neutrinos.

There are many theoretical reasons that this can be the case which will have to be proven in the future. For example, one of the reasons for the possibility in favor of the magnetic monopole tachyonic neutrinos is in the incompleteness of the symmetry in the theory of electromagnetism. The missing magnetic monopoles in the theory of electromagnetism has been a fundamental mystery from the aesthetic physical point of view.

What happens in the process of charging the capacitor is that the clumped electrons allow the tachyonic neutrinos to spend more time before finally released to the space thereby the capacitor accumulates more energy than was required to charge the capacitor initially. So, there is a temporary excess tension built up inside the capacitor which is basically the same energy coming from the repulsive electrostatic force among the same charges regardless of if they are electrons or positive ions.

When the capacitor is suddenly discharged through the space separated by two conductors but not through a resistive wire, this temporary tachyonic energy is "FROZEN" in the form of the kinetic energy of the electrons, at the same time the neutrinos lose their kinetic energy and go back to the space, where precisely the space energy extraction is materialized in reality.

The tachyonic particles have the opposite physical property of the material particles. They travel faster when they lose energy. The slowest neutrinos travel very close to the speed of light and their energy will be very large.

It is natural to conjecture that the preferable state of the tachyonic neutrinos may be by becoming the particles of infinite speed, on the other hand, the preferable state of the material particles is being at rest, after losing all of its kinetic energy, because the last part of this statement has already been known to be the truth.

## Saturday, May 22, 2010

### How to Stop the Gulf Oil Leak

The idea I'm presenting here may not reach any of the the key advisers of President Obama. However I'm going to present it here anyway. Anyone who has ears to listen will listen and I hope this idea will be delivered to them to fix this environmental disaster, unless they have already figured it out.

I almost have the feeling that they do not have the real intention to plug the hole as I have been waiting for someone to come up with a serious solution.

Basically, we have to learn from the failure of the idea of putting a gigantic concrete cap on top of the leak. It was the methane gas that basically made the concrete cap to float (or tilt) before it reaches down to the bottom of the ocean and seal the leak.

The simplest way to seal the gushing oil leak is to make a 100-200 feet long concrete pole, the diameter of which of one end is about two inches and gradually become thicker so that the diameter of the other end becomes about the twice of the size of the drilled oil hole's diameter. Also make sure to put a at least 50 feet long two inch diameter steel metal rod to stick out of the smaller diameter side of the concrete pole. And lower it vertically and slowly so that the long steel metal rod becomes the guide so that the pole does not miss the hole using the underwater camera.

The physically (and mathematically) correct way to design the correct sized concrete pole is to find the total gushing force by multiplying the outpouring pressure and the area of the hole. And then the weight(mass times 9.8m/sec^2) of the whole concrete pole has to be at least 10 - 50 times larger than the net outpouring force.

I just read in the news that BP is planning to use some kind of gigantic funnel type concrete to plug the hole. I think the idea is in the right direction but the key point here is that there is no point to make the upper side of the diameter of the "funnel" any more bigger than twice of the size of the hole. The wider the area the stronger the push out force it gets and the bigger weight will be needed. They should try to make the "funnel" plug very long to stabilize its downward movement while it is being lowered down.

The advantage of this method is that the enormous out pouring pressure of the gushing oil and the methane gas will not stop the lowering effort of this sharp pointed, long concrete "tooth pick" going down the deep water and plug that nasty "fire ant hole".

This is the only way to plug the hole 100% clean. Throwing down the rocks and debris toward the hole won't work because they will be pushed out of the entrance of the hole because of the sheer pressure of the outpouring force before they reach the bottom of the ocean.

I wonder why this type of contingency plan has not been adopted by the off shore oil drill company in case this kind of disaster happens because, as you all know, Murphy's law says "What can happen will happen".

## Saturday, May 8, 2010

### Collision of the Bullet Clusters The Dark Matter is not Dark

In this article, I'm trying to convey how the collision of the bullet clusters can be used to explain the dark matter problem within the frame work of dipole gravity. In the publicized animated video, the blue colored circular clusters are not visible by telescope or naked eyes. They are only observed indirectly by the gravitational lensing.

If there are unseen matter population expected by the blue colored spherical areas, the visible red boundary can be explained. It is caused by the collision of the two clusters of the unseen dark matters. Due to the tremendous speed of the clusters moving relative to each other, there are strong collisions among the dark matters and the light emission occurs from this massive cosmic fireworks.

So what is the fundamental problem in understanding of the dark matter?

The fundamental question is "What is the composite nature of these dark matters? Are they made of WIMP, hydrogen gas, or some other exotic form of the matters, or just plain iron and rock composition with various sizes?"

Actually this single question may be separated by two independent questions.

1. What are they made of?
2. How and why did they get there in the first place?

The answer to the second question may answer to the first question as well.

In fact, the more serious question may be the second one instead of the first, because no matter what kind of dark matter one assumes to be populated in there, he/she will always be haunted by the second question, and that is, why and how did they get there?

Is there any reason such bullet clusters should be different from other typical galaxies in the universe? There should be none if a common sense can be utilized here. The best way to find the working mechanisms of the nature is to use everything that is already available in the scientific world rather than to create a completely new beast that we know nothing about. Because you end up having an additional task of explaining the origin of the beast you have just created that will haunt you to the end. I'm referring to the so called WIMP for an example. Note that I used the tachyonic neutrinos for candidate for the "aether" which is the carrier of the lights that doesn't seem to contradict any known physical principles.

The magic of dipole gravity comes out at this point. It explains how and why the normal iron and rock composition matter of the size from a football to a boulder can be ejected from the poles of the rotating core (which can easily be a dense neutron star or a black hole) located at the center of the clusters. The size of the ejected (dark)matter will only depend on the size of the core and the rotational frequency of itself.

The repulsive poles of the rotating core becomes the strong antigravity centers and the matters are ejected like volcanoes on both the north and south poles of the rotating core. The fundamental difference between the terrestrial volcanoes and the jets from the core of the clusters is that the jets from the clusters follow the dipole gravity force lines coming out of the poles and merge into the equatorial plane of the rotating core.

To explain why then there are no visible jets from the two colliding clusters, consider the case that, if the rotational axis of the cores are not well aligned, the jets will be a random ejection with no visibly well defined jets. Also it is possible that the core of the cluster has lost its angular momentum and slowed down to almost a stop not too far distant time ago or the clusters are in the primitive developing stage of a full blown galaxy. However, regardless, the population of the ejected matter will still define the relatively homogeneous yet radial flux type distribution.

In the mean time, the strong Newtonian gravitational pull from the center organizes the well defined spherical shape of the clusters while traveling with a tremendous speed.

The essential role of dipole gravity is to make sure that there is a legitimate physical mechanism that makes such kind of population of the matter around the core of the cluster "POSSIBLE".

So, you see that there is nothing "dark" about the dark matter. They are plain old rock like matter that we can not observe directly and did not know how they got there. The key point here is that the dark matters are in constant motion under the dipole gravity force. And, as such, those matters do not have enough time to condense and become large enough to go through the typical process of nucleo-synthesis to start the nuclear fusion and generate light to be visible.

Greg Bothun was right all along, he wrote in his web page, "There is a big difference between Theory and Observation with good arguments coming from both sides. The situation is unresolved and has been for 20 years. Whomever solves the "dark matter" problem will likely win the Nobel prize.

However, its important to realize that the "dark matter" problem exists only in the context of one known long range force (gravity). Suppose there is another long range force that we are ignorant of. If this is discovered by future physicists then they will look back at this "dark matter" cosmology much the same way we now view the early "geocentric" cosmologies. "

## Friday, May 7, 2010

### Solution to The Jets and The Dark Matter Problems

Although it should be obvious up to this point of the discussion regarding dipole gravity, I would like to present the succinct mathematical form of the static portion of the extended gravity potential for the rotating hemispherical (in general, longitudinal axially asymmetric) object, for the sake of our younger generation.

The first term is the Newtonian gravity and the second term is dipole gravity where the information regarding the rotational frequency and the geometrical shape of the object are included in the parameter "delta r" which is the relativistic dynamic shift of the center of mass. The direction of the shift vector of the center of mass is toward the direction where it moves away from the stationary state.

Note that the traditional interpretation of general relativity did not allow us to include this information regarding the rotational frequency. So, general relativity could not be used to explain any of the fast rotating cosmological objects. And most of the problems related to the fast rotating cosmological objects including the spiral galaxy was begging for explanation. This is one of the reasons we have MOND and other phenomenological theories to explain them.

For a rotating full sphere, we have to add another hemisphere in the opposite direction to the one above. Since the potential function is a scalar quantity, we can add as many units of dipoles as far as their coordinates are adjusted with respect to the one single coordinate system.

If you fold two dipoles in the exact opposite direction, at the identical center of mass, the dipole effect will be canceled. However, remember that the center of mass of the two hemispherical dipoles in a single sphere are separated by the distance r (in the rest state).

So, they do not cancel in the rotating sphere.

We can now see that the poles of the fast rotating spheroidal condensed objects can be strong repulsive(antigravity) gravity centers.

This effect can cause the phenomenon of the hollow poles and the rings of the Saturn, as well as the observed jets from the fast rotating neutron stars and also from the fast rotating black holes.

This effect can also cause the stationary communication satellites to oscillate back and forth from the equatorial plane of the Earth which has been observed and by now a well known fact due to the GPS misalignment problem.

The equatorial plane of the fast rotating cosmological body is a shallow potential dip of dipole gravity which causes the debris and the satellites to oscillate back and forth around this potential dip. As the debris lose kinetic energy due to the collision and other frictional effect, they will permanently settle down at the equatorial plane to form the layers of the rings.

## Saturday, May 1, 2010

### A Diatribe on Nobel Prize

I remember when I was working for Dr. Manfred Fink in his lab at UT for the measurement of the electron’s kinetic energy coming off of the tritium decay to "essentially" measure the mass of the neutrinos. At the time, I wrote the paper on the subject that I have been deeply wondering about for a long time originally inspired by Dr. Veltman's lecture when I was at U of M. It was titled “Neutrinos Must be Tachyons” and uploaded in the LLNL archive. One day Dr. Fink happened to read it and exclaimed, “you will become very unpopular!!!” But he didn’t know exactly what my physics background was because I changed my graduate study to experimental physics after finishing my master’s degree. I remember wondering myself “why a scientist would want to become popular while his/her goal is supposed to find the truth of the nature?” I was naÃ¯ve.

"The theory of dipole gravity whoever conjured it up in his mind deserves a Nobel Prize in physics". I don't think anyone, who understands what the presently understood general relativity is, would dispute this statement. If you think of it deeply with a little bit of time, you will end up admitting that this guy must be a devil to come up with such a dreadful solution.

In fact, the matter in the scientific community has become gravely serious because of the potential ramification that the theory will bring itself with it. It has already caused a total shock among the scientific community of dark matter problems and the jets from the accretion disc of the rotating black holes. It’s almost like the same situation when the geocentric model of the universe was seriously challenged and overcome by the heliocentric model of the universe after Newton’s publication of Principia. If calculus had been developed prior to Newton’s time, the theory of Newtonian gravity would have been a five page manuscript to explain how the solar system works.

In the process of presenting a scientific statement, the secrets of the nature can be divulged by a couple of paragraphs with hints. Note the following two paragraphs,

1. There is a case that the center of mass of the object changes without any external force in the direction of the motion, for example, check it with the rotating hemisphere in conjunction with special relativity.
2. Notice that it is a case that violates Newtonian mechanical principle and see if it can be the cause of the physically meaningful dipole gravity within the framework of the known general relativity.

Things in physics always start with an unusual or a tiny physical peculiarity that sparks the question leading to the detailed mathematical proof and then the clarification of the physical concept follows.

All in all, I don’t think I will get the Nobel Prize with the theory of dipole gravity. It is not likely to happen because I committed the cardinal sin. And that is “you don’t kick butts of the people who are supposed to pet your back”. No sane human being would do such a stupid thing.

Then how could it have been possible to present the idea of dipole gravity without offending anyone in the gravitational physics?

I would appreciate anyone who can answer to this question because I would have taken that advice very seriously. But frankly I don’t think there could be any. After the presentation of the idea of dipole gravity in front of the gravitational physical scientists with the mathematical proof, you realize that you have just told them, basically, in effect, “you all have been idiots” which is not diplomatic at all, actually very far from it.

So there is no winning situation here, because most of the times, especially in the recent years, Nobel Prize would be given to someone who made the majority of the people in the same field of community happy which means that the scientific discovery would be an extension of the subject everybody in the field have been looking for, but not for something that proves them totally wrong.

And imagine the situation that they have just figured it out that they have “in fact” been wrong for such a long time. I should be grateful for not being stoned to death, I mean, if we were living somewhere in the 14th century AD, let alone expecting any kind of prize. So, I guess the human society overall has made a great heap of progress up to this point, but not enough.

We are still living in a society where “service to self” mentality prevails. And we certainly have long ways to go.

## Thursday, April 29, 2010

### Exotic Propulsion Method of a Space Craft

I believe our universe is populated by the tachyonic anti neutrinos which are created when each neutrons decays into a proton and an electron. So there are same number of anti neutrinos in the universe like that of the electron and the proton. So, the tachyonic neutrino gases define our three dimensional space like the gas molecules define the volume inside a balloon. Any kind of well defined "space" requires the existence of some sort of gas that fills up that space.

The idea I'm trying to getting at in this article is what if there is a void in front of your vehicle or space ship for that matter. The void here I'm talking about the void that does not even have the neutrinos at all. So, it can only be temporary because the void will be filled up immediately like a void in three the dimensional air space is filled up very fast. The simplest method to create acceleration is to make the space to be a true void in the close vicinity of the vehicle.

As discussed before, the reason a black hole becomes the strongest gravitational center is because the core of the black hole is a literal void of the tachyonic neutrinos. There is no meaning of time inside there because the time can not be measured in the absence of the tachyonic neutrinos. You notice that the structure of space time can be discussed using quantum gravity, but it can also be discussed by tachyonic mechanics. Can a black hole be a porthole of another dimensional manifestation of the multi verse universe? Could be. But the life form as we know it can not exist in the total void. So, it is pretty clear that in the future such a quantum field theoretical method should be replaced by tachyonic mechanics. After all, it is far more physically intuitive.

With this problem in mind, let's see what will happen when the anti neutrinos and the neutrinos meet and annihilate. It is a very interesting question because we already made the conclusion that neutrinos are tachyons that do not have the real mass. Like any matter-antimatter collision, we would expect these neutrino-anti neutrino pairs will disappear with the emission of the residual energy which we do not know if exists or not. Will they even emit light when annihilate, because they do not have the real mass, we do not know.

Regardless, I think the pair annihilation will create a void in the space, a true void that does not have anything in it. This spot in the space will become the center of the tremendous gravitational pull. Thereby creating a fantastic acceleration by the craft. So, in effect, what is needed to create this kind of propulsion engine is to create a reaction chamber that creates abundant neutrinos shooting out in the direction of the vehicles desired motion.

The question of what will happen to the annihilated neutrinos still remains. While they do not have the real mass, they do still have the kinetic energy comparable to the amount of the real mass. Since the kinetic energy has a directional property(due to linear momentum), the opposite directional kinetic energy will simply negate the kinetic energy of the other antiparticle and the whole interaction will result in a simple and clean void. The negated component(either x or y or z) of the kinetic energy becomes the direction of the propulsion. Nothing is wasted and no hazard is created in the process.

The only technical problem here is to obtain the element that creates the reverse beta decay that generates abundant neutrinos (instead of the anti neutrinos that happens in the usual neutron decay) shooting out in the direction of the vehicle's propulsion.

## Saturday, April 24, 2010

### Terribly Misunderstood Theory of Electricity and Magnetism

Someone in the ATS blog forum posted the following article.

"By the way guys, as for that over unity stuff some of you are going on about - if that were possible it would mean that our entire understanding of the universe is completely wrong. Not just a little off, but completely absolutely, back to the drawing board wrong.

Now I know a lot of you will reply saying "hey maaan, of course you scientists have got things wrong" and I accept that our model of the way the universe needs a lot of improvement, but it's going to take a lot more than a desk fan to throw away everything I know and replace it with who knows what? Does this guy even have any coherent theories?"

Yes, that's right. Scientists have completely misunderstood on how the universe operates in terms of the theory of Electricity and Magnetism which occupies a very large portion of our knowledge of the universe.

Basically we mixed the conclusion from the theory of Thermodynamics with the theory of Electricity and Magnetism together and in the process we cut off any possibilities there to utilize the anomalous effect of the energy amplification in the theory of EM for our energy use. In the following process, they made it sure that the theory of E and M satisfies the law of energy conservation and didn't look any further.

I usually call it a practice of cutting (in analogy)the legs and arms of a child who has out grown bigger than the cloth he/she wears. Of course the correct and humane solution is to throw away the old cloth and make a new one for the child. But we have the tendency of hanging onto the old cloth for some inexplicable sentimental reasons. People just can't get rid of it. I told many times to my lady friend to throw away the cloth she wears all the time, that particular pink pants that looks so ragged. Her answer to that was "I like it and I don't want to throw it away". And I said "but please you would look much prettier with the new cloth !!!". I exclaimed and her answer was "I don't care, I like it". Practically I soon realize that there is nothing I can do to change her mind.

The situation is pretty much the same with the "energy conservation law" physicists hold onto it so strongly for everything from the electromagnetism to gravity. It does not hold in the theory of Electricity and Magnetism as I showed in the Youtube video nor in the theory of gravitation when dipole gravity is included as shown in my "Extracting Gravitational Energy..." paper.

It is a foregone conclusion that the physicists must throw away the old cloth of the energy conservation law for our civilization to reach the next level. The best policy may be just keep it onto the Theory of Thermodynamics where it was solidly proven and belongs itself to but for nothing else.

The total energy may be conserved within the entire universe. I used the word "may" here because there is no way we can prove rigorously if the total energy is conserved or not inside the entire universe. It is a conjecture that finally has become a dogma especially when you try to impose it onto any branch of physics without specifying the range of its application.

In the next case of the capacitor anomaly, it is shown that the energy takes to charge a capacitor is always less than the energy charged. This does not mean that the energy is created out of nowhere. It only means that somehow the excess energy is transported to the capacitor in the process of charging. How? Obviously some unseen particles are involved in this mechanism of the energy transportation. The likelihood of this possibility is in the fact that the range of the force of the electricity and magnetism is infinite and so is in the case of gravity.

To elaborate the case, when the capacitor is charged by an external power source, the charged energy is always larger than the energy needed to charge it.

Now for a simple demonstration, imagine a two separate spherical concentric capacitors one is larger than the other one and they are made in such a way that they have the same capacitance. What are the total energy in these two spherical capacitors?
Hint: Make sure to include the energy from the repulsive electrostatic force among the same charges.

The one with the smaller radius always has more energy stored in there than the larger one despite the fact that the same amount of energy was supplied in the beginning to both of the capacitors. Why? Because the smaller capacitor has to exert more internal repulsive electrostatic force for the same amount of charges to remain inside the capacitor electrode shell. The detailed calculation and the presentation is shown in the Youtube video.

What does it take to believe that the local energy conservation law is not honored by the Theory of Electricity and Magnetism at all?

We as a collective human society have spent billions and billions of dollars for the plasma fusion research for the last several decades without any tangible outcome. If we spend only a fraction of that money on the capacitor anomaly, there is no reason human society should suffer from the lack of the energy resources. The world of peace, prosperity and tranquility is ahead of us.

“An Error Does Not Become Truth by Reason of Multiplied Propagation..”-Gandhi

"Read everything, listen to everybody. Don’t trust anything unless you can prove it with your own research.” - William Cooper

## Wednesday, April 21, 2010

### Long Held Theories Do Fall

Sometimes in the middle of night I wake up feeling chill in my back, what if, what I'm proposing here is all based on some sort of misunderstanding of the key knowledge of the universe? It is like the feeling of watching a gigantic castle you built in your life time is crumbling down in a heart beat due to the loss of foundation. I comfort myself knowing that no one has proved it can possibly be wrong. And most importantly no experimental data or observation has proved contradiction to the prediction of the theory so far.

It is a dangerous path of a work because you are standing alone in the gigantic stream of the school of thought that has totally missed the key point of it. People would have hard time to believe that the effect so tiny and negligible in the ordinary circumstances can be the cause of such a massive change of the perception of the physical science of the nature. It reminds us that physics is such an exact and meticulous scientific discipline that even a seemingly harmless and benign physical anomaly can not be overlooked.

As such, I do not find pleasure in the destruction of the monolithic structure of the established school of thoughts, aka, gravitomagnetism, Blandford-Znajek mechanism and other theories of dark matter problems etc. But, on the other hand, there is no way personally I can comfort them for their loss or the feeling of loss to be precise. Science is a harsh discipline. Either your theory is right or close to right or not right at all.

Newtonian theory of gravity may be the case that it was right but not exactly. Still, I don't think Newton would have to feel a chill in his back or suffer a loss of sleep even if he found out that he needed dipole gravity to fully explain the cosmos. After all, he was right in the enormous amount of the cosmological data. We would say he was in the right track all along.

What would Einstein feel if he were alive and knowing what we know now? He should be proud of himself and yet would be humbled by the unexpected turn of the event on the renewed interpretation of the Lense-Thirring force. But hasn't it be the way science has made progress in our history?

And life goes on as if nothing has ever happened.

“Read everything, listen to everybody. Don’t trust anything unless you can prove it with your own research.” - William Cooper.

## Sunday, April 18, 2010

### Quasars from the Perspective of Dipole Gravity

In general, the angular orientation of the remote galaxies in regard to their accretion plane and the jets can be very diverse. In other words, there is no known mechanism to dictate the orientation of the other galaxies in the universe relative to our own.

Since it has been observed that a rotating neutron star can produce jets, it is pretty clear by now that the conventional wisdom of the plasma and the magnetic field powered jets concept can not be applied to all of the cases of the cosmological jet phenomena. After all, it might as well be that the plasma and magnetic field powered jet concept was not correct at all from the beginning for any galaxies because the nature does not work on double principles that are totally incompatible to each other.

Now, we can safely assume from the perspective of dipole gravity that the quasars are a phenomenon of the result of the particular viewing angle of the ordinary remote galaxies from our observational point. When the viewing angle is within 45 degree from the direction of the axis of the jets, the accumulated intensity of the electromagnetic energy radiation resulting from the massive collisions of the matters along the passage of the incoming and the outgoing matters can be intensely magnified.

Also, even when the viewing angle is less than 30 degree, for example, the jet would still be visible as if it is going 90 degree angle from the plane of the accretion disc which is a perceptual aberration rather than the reality. It can also be expected, in such cases, that the opposite directional jets will be very faint if not totally missing from the view.

The main peculiarity of the quasars noticed by the early astronomers was their extraordinary property of the light which is unusually strong in their intensity and also the wide range of the electromagnetic spectrum compared to the light coming off of an ordinary star system.

In retrospect, I think this anomaly was closely related to the mechanism of creating the wide ranged electromagnetic energy spectrum which can not be explained without considering the kinematical nature of the production of the jets by the mechanism of dipole gravity on exactly how the massive matter to matter collsions can happen along the axis of the jets.

If, at the core of the source of the light, there is a strong gravitational center comparable to the black hole or its equivalent, the significant amount of gravitational red shift of the light spectrum can not be entirely ruled out. This also means that those strongly red shifted light sources don't necessarily be moving away fast from our own galaxy(Doppler effect).

## Thursday, April 8, 2010

### Tachyonic, Magnetic Monopole Neutrinos

Actually Tachyonic Neutrinos idea is not new. Prof. Ricami of Italy and many others have already proposed this idea long time ago. Let's add one more feature into the properties of the neutrinos and that is "Neutrinos are tachyonic magnetic monopoles". In fact I think I have already discussed this topic in my previous posts. The reason I brought up this issue again is because of this lingering questions on if the tachyonic magnetic monopole neutrinos can have both signs of charges (N and S)or only one. In theory, there is nothing to prevent them to have both polarities.

But I felt that it is awkward to assume that the universe is filled with two different kinds of tachyonic magnetic monopoles. If they do, they can be clumped up in pairs and this doesn't look pretty because the paired monopoles will negate the quantum mechanical interaction of the tachyonic monopoles with the electrons. The extremely fast passing magnetic monopoles close to an electron can make the electrons to jitter thereby causing the quantum mechanical effect. Due to the homogeneity of the tachyonic monopoles stream in every direction, the total momentum of the electron is conserved while the probability to find the electron at the same position would decrease exponentially in time. Dr. Ford at the U of M used to teach this statistical stochastic aspect of quantum mechanics in the class and he was very proud of it.

Even if there is nothing to prevent the both polarity magnetic monopoles to exist, I think our universe has chosen to have only one kind. Basically it is the same as the fact that we have a hydrogen atom which has a positively charged proton with a negatively charged electron circling around it. Somehow our universe does not have the preference to have the negatively charged proton and a positively charged electron configuration which would be the anti matter hydrogen.

If CPT (charge-parity-time) invariance holds, that means that there can be a universe populated with anti matters filled with the oppositely charged tachyonic magnetic monopoles, where the times goes backward compared to our universe. But these two universes cannot get close together. Because it would mean a gigantic explosion which is the generally accepted notion of what would happen in such cases. But if we think it over, the carrier of the light(electromagnetic waves) which is the tachyonic magnetic monopoles themselves will be paired off and they will lose the ability to carry away any light energy. So these two universes may not necessarily annihilate simply because there is no medium available to carry those energies away, although what it means by pairing off of the oppositely charged neutrinos is still a big question.

Esthetically, it would be plausible to assume that, in the beginning, two universes were created at the same time, one is our universe and the other is the one made up of the antimatter with the oppositely charged magnetic monopole neutrinos in the background where time goes opposite direction relative our universe, split into two from one single primordial entity.

But, at most, this idea will remain an interesting conjecture until we develop the technology that can bring us to the edge of the universe and be able to see and observe what's actually out there.

## Saturday, March 27, 2010

### Galactic History

Let's assume that Alex Collier made up the whole of his Andromedan contact story for profit, which is very unlikely since he is not selling anything to make money off of it. On top of that, I think there is a limit of a capacity of a person's creativity or imagination to make up a consistent and coherent stories. He/she can always forget what story he or she has made up, so the later story doesn't match with the original one. And as you let them talk over and over again repeatedly, you will see the line of the story gradually changes because the story teller thinks the updated story makes more sense than the older one and so forth.

In the end, no one will pay attention to whatever the story is being told because the story simply doesn't hold any water.

However, if you listen to what Alex Collier says, you will find the opposite happens. The story has a whole grandeur picture in it that makes sense even more after you think it over. And you come to the conclusion that this story could not possibly have been conjured up in a person's mind. Still the important point to note is that this alleged galactic history is still a view point of the Andromedans, which could be biased by some unknown reasons for their own benefit or for self grandiosity, to impress humans for the advantage in their favor.

But then there is another story by Pleidian contactee Billy Meier from Switzerland. His reputation has grown gradually recently because of his consistent predictions that have come true.

Let's assume that 90% of their story is not worth paying attention to. However, the underlying theme, which is not mentioned or emphasized by them too much, is that we are not alone in the universe. At least this message is the same in both cases. It is interesting to note though that both of the contactees try to emphasize their line of story is more authentic.

So whoever wrote the galactic history, it is still their partial view and can not be the whole story of the universe, and like in human society, you can not avoid the fact that the story teller has a tremendous potential to bias the point of view without knowing it or in some cases intentionally distort the fact for their "potential" advantage.

It is interesting to note that according to Alex Collier's translation, Andromedans think humans are royalties. Humans have certain characteristics that make them more noble than other galactic species according to Alex Collier due to many genetic engineering done to humans by the 22 different galactic civilization.

Let's assume that 90% of what Alex Collier has said was all in his imagination which is not very likely.

Still, one thing is certain, that is, at least humans are not ants compared to the vastly advanced civilizations in the universe even from the point of view of the advanced beings themselves.

A few of the memorable phrases in his contact story is when the Andromedan asked him, "I don't understand, why do you have to pay in the planet you are born into?" which hit him hard and made him to ponder over it over and over again. You have to realize that there are millions of anecdote hidden behind this question of theirs.

Another one is the story that they spend 150-200 earth years to educate their kids every knowledge they acquired up to that point of time in their planet, out of 2200- 2800 average earth years of their life span. They do not dumb down their kids and their kids are always more intelligent than their parents and this is considered an absolute necessity for the progress of their civilization, which makes absolutely perfect sense.

Even if we believe 90 percent of his story is a bogus, which is not very likely, we can get abundant hints on where our civilization have to go toward and probably that's the reason these advanced beings are trying to communicate with us.

Due to the "law of free will" in the Universe, no one civilization can force their knowledge onto others of the lesser fortunate.

However, they might want to drop a few hints here and there like in passing, as if they are trying to say "If you can catch the idea from these comments and learn from it, then it will be good for your civilization, but if not, there is nothing we can do for you".

## Tuesday, February 2, 2010

### Extended Static Gravity Potential

Although it should be obvious up to this point of the discussion regarding dipole gravity, I would like to present the succinct mathematical form of the static portion of the extended gravity potential for the rotating hemispherical (in general, longitudinal axially asymmetric) object, for the sake of our younger generation.

The first term is the Newtonian gravity and the second term is dipole gravity where the information regarding the rotational frequency and the geometrical shape of the object are included in the parameter "delta r" which is the relativistic dynamic shift of the center of mass. The direction of the shift vector of the center of mass is toward the direction where it moves away from the stationary state.

Note that the traditional interpretation of general relativity did not allow us to include this information regarding the rotational frequency. So, general relativity could not be used to explain any of the fast rotating cosmological objects. And most of the problems related to the fast rotating cosmological objects including the spiral galaxy was begging for explanation. This is one of the reasons we have MOND and other phenomenological theories to explain them.

For a rotating full sphere, we have to add another hemisphere in the opposite direction to the one above. Since the potential function is a scalar quantity, we can add as many units of dipoles as far as their coordinates are adjusted with respect to the one single coordinate system.

If you fold two dipoles in the exact opposite direction, at the identical center of mass, the dipole effect will be canceled. However, remember that the center of mass of the two hemispherical dipoles in a single sphere are separated by the distance r (in the rest state).

So, they do not cancel in a rotating sphere.

We can now see that the poles of the fast rotating spheroidal condensed objects can be strong repulsive(antigravity) gravity centers.

This effect can cause the phenomenon of the hollow poles and the rings of the Saturn, as well as the observed jets from the fast rotating neutron stars and also from the fast rotating black holes.

This effect can also cause the stationary communication satellites to oscillate back and forth from the equatorial plane of the Earth which has been observed and by now a well known fact due to the GPS misalignment problem.

The equatorial plane of the fast rotating cosmological body is a shallow potential dip of dipole gravity which causes the debris and the satellites to oscillate back and forth around this potential dip. As the debris lose kinetic energy due to the collision and other frictional effect, they will permanently settle down at the equatorial plane to form the layers of the rings.

## Sunday, January 31, 2010

### Q and A session with a Student

Pardon, Dr. Jeong, but I was looking into your discussion into dipole gravity and came upon particular objections that I was hoping you'd be willing to field for me.

Q: 1. An object's gravitational dipole is a measure of how much that mass is distributed away from some center in some direction. It's a vector, since it had to convey not only how much the mass is off-center but also which way. Considering some object in the abstract, the natural 'center' to pick is the center of mass, which is the point around which the dipole is zero.

A: The gravitational dipole moment cannot be defined in the classical mechanics because the center of mass can be made to be the center of the coordinate system at all times, if we are allowed to discuss it in the context of the linearized weak field limit of general relativity. So, there is no meaning of dipole gravity in the classical Newtonian mechanics. That's why there is no known definition of gravitational dipole moment in the known theory of gravity. However if we try to define gravitational dipole moment in comparison to the electromagnetism, one has to have a negative mass which is not a physically meaningful object. Because of this, we are always reminded of the fact that gravity is not the same as electromagnetism. They do not operate with the same physical principle.

Dipole gravity is a solution of general relativity that provides the answer to the origin of the Lense-Thirring force. Therefore, it provides the correct definition of the gravitational dipole moment, that is, it is the mass times the dynamic shift of the center of mass caused by special relativity due to the specific geometry of the object and the speed of rotation .

Q: 2. Oscillating electric dipoles radiate electromagnetic waves. But for gravitational radiation you need an oscillating quadrupole moment. The difference is that electric charge comes in two varieties of charge, plus and minus. When you interchange the two charges, as in an oscillating electric dipole, you get a change in the electric field distribution. Gravitational mass, on the other hand, comes in only one sign: plus. There are no minus values. So if you interchange two masses you don't get a change in the gravitational field. Hence, no dipole radiation.

A. Dipole gravity is a static field, it doesn't radiate. It exerts force on a stationary object. It is an another reminder that gravity is not the same as that of electromagnetism. On the other hand, gravitational radiation may come from the time dependent quadrupole field.

Q: 3. Another way to see this is as follows. Radiation comes from accelerating sources. When a quadrupole rotates, there is the usual acceleration associated with rotation. A dipole depends on the displacement of the center of mass from some fixed point. The velocity of the center of mass is simply given by the total momentum divided by the total mass. Since each of these quantities is conserved, the velocity of the center of mass doesn't change. In other words, it doesn't accelerate. So there's no dipole gravitational radiation.

A: Again, dipole gravity is not radiative. The general results of electromagnetism can not be blindly assumed to happen in gravity.

The conventional gravitomagnetism is the result of the same misunderstanding regarding the property of gravity and the wrong assumption that somehow gravity and the electromagnetism may/could be very similar.

---In general, an isolated gravitational dipole moment can not be localized, which means that it is a perpetually accelerating object due to the gravitational interaction of itself with the rest of the universe, which obviously can be the key to the problem of the space adventure.---

I hope this could clarify your question.

Anything you could tell me would be greatly appreciated.

## Thursday, January 28, 2010

### Was Einstein right?

Was Einstein right?
Relativity celebrates 100 years of scrutiny
February 2005

Back to article

Some historians trace the start of the modern era not to the turn of the 20th century, nor to the onset of World War I, but to May 29, 1919.

On that date, said physicist Clifford Will, a total eclipse of the Sun blanketed the Southern hemisphere. In those few brief moments of darkness, teams of British astronomers stationed in Brazil and West Africa were able to measure the bending of starlight predicted by Albert Einstein's nascent theory of general relativity.

Gravity Probe B with solar panels folded.
It was the first experimental proof of a theory that, as Will said, "has changed forever the way we think about space, about time, and about the universe as a whole."

Will, the James McDonnell professor of physics at Washington University in Saint Louis, was the third speaker in the 2005 Penn State Lectures on the Frontiers of Science, titled "Einstein's Legacy." His talk on February 5 at University Park traced the history of efforts to confirm Einstein's profundity.

"When Einstein invented his special theory of relativity in 1905, he was a pretty obscure scientist," Will said. "Even with general relativity in 1915, he was still really known only in science circles." When the 1919 results were announced in London in November of that year, he instantly became an international celebrity. "For the rest of his life, he was the symbol of genius."

Ups and Downs
By the mid 1920s, however, Einstein had turned his attention away from relativity to search for a unified theory of matter. "The field went into pretty rapid decline," Will said. "It was thought that general relativity was too difficult for ordinary mortals to understand." More important, the theory had few observable effects.

Too, "Einstein himself seemed rather blasÃ© about experimental consequences," Will said. On receiving the telegram announcing the eclipse measurements, he was famously unimpressed. "I do not believe that the main significance of the general theory of relativity is the prediction of some effects," he wrote later, "but rather the elegance of its formation and the simplicity of its conception."

Lacking experiment to test and balance the theory, relativity became "a sterile field, a scientific backwater," Will said. "That began to change in the 1960s. Today it's one of the hottest fields in physics."

One key element in this renaissance, Will said, "was a revolution in astronomy." The rapid-fire discoveries of quasars in 1961, cosmic background radiation in 1964, pulsars in 1965, and the first black-hole candidate in 1971 revealed a whole new universe, riddled with objects of extremely high energy and density. "Understanding these sources required general relativity," Will said.

Also important was a new approach to thinking about the theory. "New textbooks written in the 1970s made it simple enough to teach, to the point where today it is taught to undergraduates."

Finally, technological leaps beginning in the 1960s enabled huge improvements in precision measurement with tools like atomic clocks, lasers, and radar. Together, these gains have allowed increasingly precise tests of Einstein's theory.

Ways of Knowing
Bending light. In Einstein's description, space is curved by the effects of gravity. Light passing through space necessarily follows this curve, and the stronger the force of gravity, the more the light is bent. Thus, bending should be largest for light passing close to a massive body like the Sun.

The 1919 expedition used an eclipse to mask the solar brightness and observe this phenomenon. As Einstein had predicted, the Sun's gravity pulled nearby stars into slightly different positions compared to where those stars are seen at other times of the year when the Sun is far away from them.

The discovery of quasars — strong, sharp, radio sources — and the development of radio interferometry during the 1960s allowed much more precise measurements of this bending, Will noted. By measuring the angle between two quasars (known as 3C273 and 3C279) that pass near the Sun in October each year, astronomers have confirmed that the observable bending agrees with general relativity to within a few parts in 10,000.

Orbit of Mercury. Mercury's path around the Sun is elliptical, shaped like a racetrack oval. According to Newton, such an orbit should be fixed in space. Mercury's, however, precesses; that is, the entire ellipse rotates slowly around the Sun. Very slowly — only 570 arc seconds, or less than two degrees, per century — but still enough to be a problem for celestial mechanics.

In the 1850s, the French astronomer Urbain Le Verrier explained this precession as a result of disturbances caused by the gravitational pull of nearby planets. Once these effects were toted up, however, there remained a gap of about 40 seconds of arc per century between Newton's prediction and the observed value. For 50 years this discrepancy remained a pebble in the shoe of astrophysics. Scientists even posited a hidden planet, Vulcan, to explain it. When Einstein finished the calculations of general relativity in 1915, however, he found that the predicted additional effects of his theory on Mercury's orbit exactly matched the 40-second gap.

The Space-Time twist. General relativity also predicts that massive rotating objects should drag space-time around themselves as they rotate. This effect, known as "frame dragging," is akin to what would happen if a bowling ball were set spinning in a tub of molasses. By bouncing laser beams off reflective satellites in space, Will said, scientists have recently managed to make the first tentative measurements of frame dragging. Last April, NASA launched the Gravity Probe B satellite, with an experiment intended to capture this effect much more precisely — by measuring tiny changes in the direction of spin of four orbiting gyroscopes. The probe's first results are expected in early 2006.

Slight disturbances in the fabric of the universe.
Gravitational waves. Sometimes thought of as ripples in space-time, gravitational waves are slight disturbances in the fabric of the universe caused by the motions of matter. The problem, said Will, is that these ripples are so small they've been impossible to measure.

In 1974, Russell Hulse and Joseph Taylor, then at the University of Massachusetts, discovered the first binary pulsar: a system of two rapidly spinning neutron stars locked in orbit around each other. Measuring the timing pattern of pulses coming from one of these stars over a period of years, Hulse and Taylor deduced that the two are rotating faster and faster in a smaller and smaller orbit — evidence for an energy drain caused by emitting gravitational waves.

The result earned a Nobel prize in 1993. Since then, Will noted, "There's been a world-wide effort to detect gravitational waves using giant laser interferometers." The two such detectors in the U.S., know collectively as the Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory, or LIGO, have perpendicular arms 2.5 miles long. A much larger, space-based observatory, the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna, or LISA, is scheduled to launch in 2012.

The Verdict
Was Einstein right? "Yes," Will concluded. "Over a hundred years, general relativity has passed every experimental test put to it with flying colors.

"The truly amazing thing to me is that a theory that was invented purely on aesthetic criteria, with no regard for experiment, turned out to be so right in the end."

I would like to add my own comment that his theory of general relativty was right more than he and/or his contemporary physicists thought it was. However he was wrong on his initial assessment on the non existing component of dipole gravity in his own theory, at the same time with the centrifugal force interpretation of the Lense-Thirring force. Now, with dipole gravity, the black hole jets and the dark matter problems are within the solid grip of general relativity which has not been the case since the birth of general relativity. At this point I don't think anyone can dispute the validity of general relativity. Dipole gravity has set general relativity in the firm solid ground.