The End of the Princeton Wheeler Group’s Reign on Gravitation

The great teacher John Archibald Wheeler has passed away. His group’s legacy can be summarized by the massive rendition on the subject of general relativity in the book “Gravitation” by Kip Thorne et al. The book influenced and inspired many great minds of the modern scientific world. The following quote is his view on gravitomagnetism.


From this quote, one can see his strong conviction that there must be gravitomagnetism in the mechanical universe.

However, being a great teacher did not always go along with being a great innovator. James Maxwell was one of the examples. He is not known as being a great teacher. Maybe Albert Einstein was another one. It seems that the brain of a human being can not be both ways. Either it can be deeply innovative inside his/her soul or widely interactive with other human beings.

His long search for the true gravitomagnetism in general relativity has not resulted in the finding of dipole gravity, the true gravitomagnetism. It is tragic in a way. But this event may have been predicted by Nostradamus 500 years ago.

The reason for the persistent effort in search of the true gravitomagnetism was obviously to find a way to counteract gravity, the eternal yoke all living things have to endure. By having gravitomagnetism, we have a repulsive gravity which can negate the unstoppable pulling effect of gravity. It means the ultimate freedom of physical bodies. If we are lucky, it may also be possible to explain the so far unexplained cosmological phenomena, ie, the jets and the dark matter problems, which have been considered possible failures of general relativity in the large scale universe.

Because of the delay in the finding of the true gravitomagnetism, so far, we had many independent branches of theories to deal with this unending enigma. Finally, Wheeler’s vision of the true gravitomagnetism has been fulfilled by the theory of dipole gravity.

This is the end of the old era and the beginning of the new era in the science of gravitation.

Why is it hurting the physics community for the leading experts in the field not commenting on it?

I can see so many graduate students and the post docs want to write thesis and research papers regarding dipole gravity in application to the various cosmological problems.
But they are afraid it may not pass the referee when they submit the paper to the journal where the major editors and referees are heavily influenced by the existing dogma. Their own advisors may not even approve of the idea in the first place.

It’s a catch 22 game. That’s why I’m trying to break the silence of the major leaders in this field. Without their (whoever they think are experts in the field) clear pro or con statement, everyone will be in the mode of a suspense.

Well, they may think to themselves, “Why should I comment on it when it is so obvious? It is correct and we obviously missed it.” “Do you have to be so sadistic enough to torture us in public?”

The problem with it is that you have no concern of the graduate students and the researches in the field, and/or the general progress of the science, any more than your own tail bone. When you have portrayed yourself as an expert in the field, it is your obligation to recognize the major development in the field and let the audience know about it because they are looking upon you for the key information regarding the new development.

It is a serious ethical issue.

You are afraid of losing the false image you have projected upon yourself as an expert in the field disintegrating in a plain sight. It is an image of a rainbow you are holding onto. It is not there anymore.

We need to move on, Dr. Kip Thorne, please speak up.

What is this theory of dipole gravity? I bet you know about it better than anyone else. You can explain it with far greater clarity than I can describe it, I’m sure.

And that’s your duty; as a communicator and interpreter of the divine secret of the nature.

Why Dipole Gravity is Such a Big Deal?

If you examine the theory of dipole gravity in detail, the simplicity of its concept is so overwhelming that you realize quickly there are no possibilities of those theories of plasma and magnetic field induced jet phenomena and the MOND related cosmologies can possibly be correct. Contrary to the case at the early times of general relativity, we are facing with the fact that we have to denounce many of the previous academic results in which so much energy, time and brain have been spent. It is one of those hardest things to do in science.

General relativity interpreted in early days didn’t have to prove anyone wrong. It could easily be considered an improved version of the theory of gravity with all the salient features of the Newtonian gravity intact. So it was a relatively easy thing to take in.

Now with dipole gravity, the result will be virtually an academic tsunami. You can not rigorously present the theory without telling them their theories have been all wrong. I wish there could be an alternative easy way. A lot (thousands) of the past papers and articles related to the subject will have to be trashed overnight which has already happened except that the majority of the authors do not realize it has. People in the field have to start all over again with the new light of dipole gravity. We are at the moment of a deadly silence before the perfect storm.

I think there will be a break down point from the analysis of the GP-B probe data because there is no way they can explain away their anomalous data without using dipole gravity which is the true theory of gravitomagnetism.

If the conventional gravitomagnetism were correct, there should be a prediction of the opposite polarity of gravity from their theory. The physical implication of gravitomagentism inherently contains the meaning that there is a repulsive gravity. Did the conventional gravitomagentism predict any form of repulsive gravity? The answer is no. So one has to admit that we have been in a total darkness in regard to the phenomenon of the gravitomagnetism, the Lense-Thirring force and the acceleration induced gravity. And these are supposed to be the major part of general relativity.

In his book on “Black Holes & Time Warps”, Kip Thorne states that in his early days at Princeton, his advisor John A. Wheeler asked him to see if there is a magnetic counter part of gravity within general relativity. Of course, he couldn’t find any. He presented in his book the description of the jet phenomenon using the Blanford-Znajek process without any qualm. So one can imagine that the situation has reached the point where each of the theorists has to cover each other’s behind upon the revelation of dipole gravity. It is easy to see this because Kip Thorne kept the theory within himself knowingly that it is an earth shattering discovery that he was supposed to find out upon John A. Wheeler’s suggestion in his early days. He was about to keep it under the rug and brush it off as long as he possibly can. How about the average graduate students and the researchers in the field who have to suffer because of this kind of willful deceit to the scientific community as a leader in the field? Does he care?

They are more interested in protecting each other’s personal dignity than the promulgation of the truth in science. I don’t think this is a true honest and honorable attitude of a scientist. History will judge them dearly.

Send him this article by email and request him for an open explanation.

kip@tapir.caltech.edu

Self Evident Dipole Gravity

If you say “theory” people normally become immediately skeptical about it thinking “ok, what kind of unlikely assumption is proposed in there?” MOND (Modified Newtonian Dynamics) is certainly a “theory” which is riddled with unthinkable contradictions, like non conserving energy and momentum without a justifiable reason. Whenever I mention about the theory of dipole gravity, this is a kind of a general reaction. There are so many shaky theories that are unverified, untested, circling around in the field of physics that sometimes it is hard to tell which are the correct theory and which isn’t. First of all, the theory of black hole will never be tested by experiment so it will remain as a “theory” as long as it exists.

What we have learned in the Classical Mechanics is that we can predict what is going to happen to the bodies of the celestial object when they are influenced by the law of Newtonian gravity. Detailed calculation is hardly necessary to understand the properties of the fundamental trajectory, for example; either if it is an elliptical orbit or a parabolic one.

The principle is basically the same with dipole gravity. You can predict many features of the motion of the celestial bodies without resort to a detailed calculation. The fundamental gravity force lines are the ones that the cosmic objects will follow in their orbit or the passages that are running perpendicular to it. From this observation, the presence of the dark matter halo becomes self evident around the fast rotating ultra compact stellar objects as well as the jets. The visibility issue is only a matter of considering if there will be enough collisions among the debris specifically for the case of the jets, and if there is going to be long enough time for them to coagulate and proceed to the thermonuclear synthesis for the generation of heat and energy as in the case of the stars.

Unfortunately it took nine years after the publication of dipole gravity to realize that the Lense-Thirring force had the wrong sign. Without this finding, there would have been no consistent understanding of the jets and the dark matter problem within general relativity. Dipole gravity is not a theory as one would normally think of a “theory”. It is a self evident general relativity. The fact that it took so long to find the solution doesn’t mean that it had to be a horrendously difficult problem. On the contrary, it was an exceedingly simple solution when the right concept was applied.

This is the reason the experts in the field refuse talking about it. You can not talk about it while being known as a renowned expert in the field of cosmology and general relativity, because if you do, it will be tantamount to an admission of a total incompetence.

Is it my fault to make them feel incompetent? Of course not.

I don’t think anyone will tell them to quit their job for being incompetent. It is purely a human factor of arrogance and pretentiousness that prevents them from coming forward. After all we are all human beings that are fallible and susceptible to error.

I don’t think I’m infallible either. I fixed the sign of the Lense-Thirring force in the 1999 paper to make it match with the known form. It could have been considered a form of an academic dishonesty in a way. I should not have followed the errors of the previous researchers. But I came forward to announce that it was an error despite its general acceptance in the physics community for the last 90 years without any contest, after a careful scrutiny of the various problems of cosmology. It was not an easy conclusion to draw, because it has passed the test of the numerous physicists and the brightest minds. So unless you're absolutely sure, no one will make such a drastic claim. But I'm hundred percent positive about this claim, "Lense-Thirring force has the wrong sign".

What matters is not what others think or regard of yourself. What really matters is “what is the real truth of the nature?” Any theory in physics or science or any field of study for that matter can be challenged, modified or/and improved.

Paradigm Shift

General Relativity was much Bigger than Einstein Could Imagine of it Himself

If you are a professor in an academic institution, you can not afford not to learn the theory of dipole gravity. It's time to revise and rewrite your 20 year old note books on mechanics and the theory of gravitation that you have been teaching in the class over and over again. Physics at the present time is not a sole trademark of a few individuals like at the time of Galileo.

The nations of the world have prominent physicists and scientists with their own independent thoughts and capabilities of judgement to realize what is the significance of dipole gravity. This kind of activity is called in the medical field as "continued education", to accommodate the newly discovered medical facts and important discoveries for the cure of human disease conditions.

The lack of the progress and understanding of the mechanics of the nature is a disease condition in the field of science so to speak.

I realized that contrary to the thinking of many graduate/undergraduate students, the professors in the field of cosmology and gravitation or any field of science can be as ignorant as the students themselves in certain areas of expertise. This is a simple fact. If you haven't been taught by others or by yourself, there is no way you can learn about any new field of science.

One of the fastest way to learn dipole gravity is to exercise the derivation of the Lense-Thirring force using the two opposite dipole gravity potential by taking a gradient of them. This exercise includes the derivation of the relativistic shift of the center of mass from the rotating hemisphere.

One can solve so many problems in cosmology just using the conventional Newtonian potential plus dipole gravity. And you don't have to go through the details of general relativity to learn so many important aspects of cosmology.

So, it would be appropriate to include dipole gravity at least in the text books of the classical mechanics of the graduate courses if not in the undergraduate ones.

You will learn eventually that general relativity was actually meant to find dipole gravity. The reason is because there is not much testable cosmological problems beyond the second order effect of general relativity. Although it may be considered that general relativity has been tested in many different venues, as you may read from the NASA article on "In Search of Gravitomagnetism", which is considered the key to the solution of general relativity, the true nature of the general relativistic gravitomagnetism has never been known. The so called conventional "gravitomagentism" and its prediction for the amount of the precession of the gyro were derived from the modified Maxwell's equation, which is not the correct theory of gravitation. To be more specific, the conventional gravitomagnetism has never succeeded in deriving the Lense-Thirring force or any forms close to it.

The fundamental irony of this exploration is that general relativity was much bigger than Einstein could imagine of it himself. But then Newton was totally engaged himself in alchemy in his later years as well. After all, we are all gullible to our own idiosyncrasies.

The main problem with the conventional gravitomagnetism is not knowing which side of the rotating ring becomes the attractive gravity pole and which side the repulsive one. Unless one assumes that the copious amount of positrons (just as many as the number of the electrons) can be created by some miraculous way at the core of the accretion discs, there is no way one can explain the symmetric jets using the Penrose mechanism.

It's like people built houses on a sand dune when they used the conventional gravitomagnetism for the explanation of the jets. This should be a lesson for the future theorists in the field of science.

Another Mystery of the Nature

I think I have done enough of an introduction for the theory of dipole gravity so far. I would rather think of it like an effective method of presenting at a department seminar or a colloquium, which is open to the general public as well, without having to visit the individual universities. However, there is nothing barely new in this blog beyond the two papers published in 1997 and 1999 which have basically all the necessary information to make a good starting point, although those papers may not have been clear and obvious enough to make a bold statement like “the Lense-Thirring force has wrong sign”.

If you find something that you have been looking for a long time and ultimately gave up on any attempt finding it, you will be in disbelief once you see it in front of your eyes. People will shake their heads in total disbelief saying, “Nah, it can’t be”. This has been the situation with dipole gravity.

Since I could be blamed for my inactivity on the theory of dipole gravity after its publication (as people normally send copies of preprints to their colleagues), I guess I need to explain what I was doing in the mean time of nine years. Why did I not actively promote the theory in 1999 if I had such a strong belief about it? First of all, I thought that was already an exciting discovery that anyone would eager to pick it up and publish tons of papers by expanding and applying it to the various cosmological problems. Was I naïve? Those papers were uploaded in the LLNL archives so that they can be plainly visible to everybody anyways.

One of the writers of the scientific story once said there will be only a handful of people who can truly understand the theory of dipole gravity in the world. And the ones who truly understand it are not willing to talk about it. What a shame! She can write a story only when someone else either agrees, disagrees or throws questions on it. It’s like a black pit hole of information. A bunch of information goes in and being processed but no result comes out.

After the publication of the two papers and discussing them briefly in the internet, I received emails from all over the world, regarding the exciting experiments that have been performed and demonstrated in front of the public. I thought that this could be an elaborate hoax.

One of the many of the information was about the inventor Thomas Henry Moray who was active in invention of the energy device in Utah in 1930s. He allegedly succeeded in making a device that can generate 50 kW of electricity out of thin air for 157 hours. I was extremely intrigued by the proposition. The main reason that I received this kind of email letter was because the theory of dipole gravity predicts the possibility of extracting energy from space as well. I later noticed that there are tons of inventors involved in this exciting project behind the scene.

I was about to find out if this is an elaborate hoax or a legitimate physics. You can imagine how I ended up forgetting about promoting the theory of dipole gravity. Dipole gravity is an exciting concept as well, but as a method of producing energy, it is bulky and cumbersome. If the story provided to me were true, we have a huge chunk of physics missing, undiscovered and untouched which can potentially revolutionize our civilization overnight. After all, if dipole gravity has proved it is possible to extract energy from space, why not by a method of electricity and magnetism? It would be much simpler and elegant if indeed it is possible.

We are about to enter the realm of a virtual “25th century science” so I advise the readers to hold tightly on to their seats. Enter

What is Dipole Gravity and What It isn’t?

In a recent communication with a prominent astrophysicist, I noticed that there is a general misconception about the theory of dipole gravity. Somehow people seem to think dipole gravity is some kind of a modification of general relativity.

This is far from the truth. Dipole gravity is not a modification of general relativity. Although it may sound bizarre, the general relativistic gravitational field both the inside and out of a rotating spherical source has never been fully worked out. In Newtonian gravity, the gravitational field inside a spherical shell is zero. However, due to the equivalence principle, general relativity predicts that there will be an induced gravity field due the constant acceleration of the mass resulted by the rotational motion of the object.

Because of the enormous complexity of the integral calculation, the only known solution to this problem was available only at the close distance from the center of the sphere which has been worked out by Lense and Thirring in 1918. In their original paper, they found the general relativistic gravity force close to the center of the rotating spherical shell which was given by,


These forces have been known as Lense-Thirring force. The x and y component of the force shows the radially outgoing structure which has contributed to the notion that it is a manifestation of the centrifugal force in accordance with Mach’s principle.

However, the presence of the attractive harmonic z component of the force was enigmatic from the beginning. There are historical records showing that Thirring had correspondences with Einstein in several occasions regarding this problem. Obviously, it baffled Thirring as much as Einstein.

It must be emphasized that the above expression is valid only for small x, y, z which is very close to the center of the rotating spherical shell. In other areas beyond the center of the sphere, the integral calculation is simply impossible. This form of the force ceases to have any meaning as soon as the distance from the center increases beyond the closest proximity. And the known solution to the linearized theory of general relativity has stated that the rotating spherical mass does not have a meaningful dipole term, which is true only in the very far distances. So this problem has been left out as an open question in general relativity since its birth.

The conventionally known "gravitomagnetism", which is a modified version of Maxwell's equation, was one of the desperate attempts to understand the extension of the Lense-Thirring force and the acceleration induced gravity effect beyond the limit of the proximity to the center of the rotating source. Needless to say, there is no mention of the derivation of the Lense-Thirring force or any form close to it, from this formulation at the distance close to the center of the sphere.

There simply was no known general relativistic solution in the intermediate area away from the center to the relatively close distance from the surface of the rotating spherical source.

This means that the general relativistic gravity field induced by the rotational motion of a spherical object has never been fully understood to include the entire space beyond the close proximity to the center.

What the theory of dipole gravity has accomplished is that it calculated and showed the compact mathematical form describing all the details of the field inside and out of the rotating spherical source. This was achieved by dividing the sphere into two sectors of the hemispheres, and by calculating the fields individually and adding them together, which is possible because the potential function is a scalar quantity.

The field close to the center calculated from this method produced the Lense-Thirring force of the form,


Several points can be noticed.

1. Both forms have the same sign correlations, eg, the radial and the axial component of the forces have the opposite sign with respect to each other.

2. They have the equal functional form as second order differential equations.

3. There is a uniform difference of a constant factor 2/15 between the two expressions.

4. The form derived from dipole gravity has the missing velocity dependent component of the force.

In the theory of dipole gravity, it has been specifically pointed out that only the diagonal component of the metric tensor is considered. The velocity dependent force can be added later without the loss of generality.

The difference of the constant factor by 2/15 may be explained by considering the fact that the center of the sphere is close to the centers of the two separate hemispheres. The centers of the two hemispheres are singularity points where the dipole field becomes infinity(which is a mathematical artifact) and the field close to the center of the hemispheres within the range of R/2 will not be accurate(larger than actually it is), which explains the discrepancy. This problem can easily be fixed by introducing a form factor etha.


Now, the total potential without singularity can be written



However, this was not the end of the story. The further surprising irony was that the signs of the Lense-Thirring forces are all reversed as later found out. Once the Lense-Thirring force is identified as the residual force from the two oppositely superposed long ranged dipole fields within the rotating spherical shell, the continuity of the force lines all around the space becomes an important issue.

Since we are aware of the jets and the dark matter problems in cosmology, the conventionally known signs of the Lense-Thirring force become very problematic. The repulsive radial force is not consistent with the dark matter problem any more than the attractive axial component of the force with the jets. Dark matter problems will be solved easily if the radial component of the force were attractive and the jets would be explained easily if the axial component of the force were repulsive.

In fact, the original formulation from dipole gravity showed the reversed signs for the Lense-Thirring force. However, since there was no compelling reason to doubt the correctness of the signs of the 90 year old formula, before applying the force to the actual cosmological problems, the result was simply adjusted to conform to the known results. Even the jet problem seemed all right with the original signs of Lense-Thirring configuration.

It was only with the dark matter problems that the signs of the Lense-Thirring force looked awfully awkward. One can not have the accretion phenomenon with the repulsive radial force, let alone the fast rotating spiral form of the galaxy. And the jet phenomenon seemed more easily explainable with the corrected signs of the Lense-Thirring force.

The necessary presence of the dark matter halo which is an absolute requirement for the explanation of the flat rotation curves within dipole gravity and also in dark matter hypothesis was the final nail on the coffin of the original signs of the Lense-Thirring force. It simply can’t be the other way around. The matters ejected by the jets have to come back to the equatorial plane and eventually to the galactic center to be recycled. The force lines depicted by the corrected Lense-Thirring force matched perfectly with this picture. If the original signs of the Lense-Thirring force were correct, matters will be ejected radially from the equatorial center to the plane and come back to the both poles which is against all odds.

More specifically, if this is the case, since the direction of the dipole gravity force lines and the Newtonian gravity force lines are in the same direction at the both poles, that are attractive, there will be no jets visible, because the accompanying two forces lines do not allow the debris to collide among themselves.

The dark matters are basically the debris in space in transit following this dipole gravity force lines.

Einstein was inspired by Mach's view of the universe and of the origin of the centrifugal force when he formalized general relativity. Naturally he expected that his theory of gravity should reflect Mach's point of view. The Lense-Thirring force was at the right spot and at the right moment. In his mind and that of Lense-Thirring's, there was no doubt that the force they derived from the second order effect of gravity was the manifestation and proof of Mach's principle. But how many times in the history of physics, people are inspired by something and discover something else totally new. But in general, I think, there is a general tendency of a bias when people strongly expect something to come out of their research activities.

Now, it is clear that the total general relativistic gravity field including the Newtonian gravity can be written
for a rotating hemispherical source. In a multiply connected dipole configuration, the second term will be represented by sums of all the existing dipoles in the system. For an example, the dipole field from a rotating sphere has to be a sum of the two oppositely connected dipoles within the source.

Any cosmological problems involving a rotating source will need this formulation to accurately describe the mechanics of the system just like we use Newtonian gravity to describe the non-rotating(very slowly rotating) stellar configurations.

It is not surprising at all that one has to make all kinds of extra assumptions to account for the baffling problems in cosmology, when this second order dipole gravity term was not present, even to the degree that the whole Newtonian mechanics has to be modified, let alone the plasma and the magnetic field for the jet phenomenon.

The correct order of the approach to solve the problem would be to apply this dipole gravity for the jets and the dark matter problems first and if it still doesn't work then use any additional tools to account for the further minute details.

In this regards, I noticed that the GPB data have been processed using the theoretical results derived from the conventional gravitomagnetism which is a wrong theory of gravity. The dipole gravity has the entirely different topological property compared to the theory derived from the modified Maxwell's equation. A rotating spherical mass has four distinctive poles instead of the two according to the dipole solution of general relativity. So, if the GPB data don't fit the predictions, they have to suspect that it may not be because of the systematic experimental error but because of the incorrect theoretical assumptions.

I'm sure this is not the end of cosmology. I hope dipole gravity can inspire young minds and help them discover something much bigger than the surface it barely scratched. I also hope it becomes the beginning of the new era of the engineering of this new scientific concept for the future space adventure of the mankind.

What has inspired the whole concept of dipole gravity?