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).