The Dictatorial Power of the Scientific Truth

The Darwinian principle of the theory of the evolution of the origin of the species and its subsequent archaeological proof left us little choice for an alternative explanation. Naturally, this has caused a great concern for the future of humanity among the philosophers in the field of anthropology. Due to the lack of the resources or the uncontrollable catastrophe, like that happened to the dinosaurs, human species will be extinct at certain point of time in the future and we have to do something about it, they theorized.

However, it must be noted that this kind of doomsday philosophy has already assumed that there are limited resources and there will be no other technology available for the change of the situation in the remote future. So when a certain scientific doctrine is used allegedly to protect the future of the human species, one can go a great distance to a morally horrifying scenario. Any theoretical attempt or plan for the global population reduction, therefore, is flawed because it was contemplated based on the wrong premises that there will be no advanced technology that will alleviate the current situation of the earth’s civilization. For a typical example, Ted Turner’s avid support for this kind of program is appalling.

Human society should spend substantial amount of time and energy on the development of this future technology and seriously think about going out of the earth’s surface to the far distant stars because the earth is not going to be the ultimate resting place for the human species. Somehow the relative location of the solar system in our galaxy makes it vulnerable to the frequent bombardment of the asteroids. And whenever it happens, the living organisms on earth suffer a great damage.

We may have to find a much stable and quiet star system inside the galaxy that all of the human species can migrate into. When people draw conclusions following the Darwinian theory of evolution, the inherent danger is there. We don’t know the full secret of the laws of the nature and what will be its possible benefits for the mankind.

What scares people especially in the field of cosmology about the theory of dipole gravity is that it deprives them of the freedom to be wrong. It must be emphasized that the scientific truth is not determined by a popular vote. Either it is correct or it is a false. What determines the ultimate fate of it is, of course, repeated experimental measurements and/or the existing observational confirmation. There are cases that a theory is partially correct. In general, in the field of science, even when a certain theory is correct, it always has a limited scope of its applicable domain. A lot of the researchers in the field already knew MOND can’t be a correct theory of the universe. However, in the absence of any alternative theory, MOND flourished because of its correct predictions of a lot of the rotational velocity curves. We enjoy and thrive in our freedom to be wrong. But like in any business decisions, being wrong means the loss of time, energy and resources.

We feel we are deprived of our freedom when a teacher came out say you can’t do those immoral things, and show proofs. We would rather stone or crucify him/her. This kind of pattern has been repeated many times in the history of mankind.

Reader's Feedback(Geometrical Question)

Some of the readers of the dipole gravity blog may wonder if I have received any private emails challenging the basic concept of dipole gravity. Since I have been speaking out openly regarding dipole gravity to the general public, I have received none. I openly invited for debates, but no one volunteered to come forward. I'll post any critical errors or mistakes in the presentation of dipole gravity pointed out by the readers in the blog.

One of the minor errors pointed out by one of the readers was about the location of the center of mass of a solid hemisphere. I used hemispherical shell for the dipole gravity model in the published papers, since a spherical shell was used by Lense-Thirring as a model in their calculation for the purpose of simplicity. It was a good starting point for the proof of concept.

In the case of a hemispherical shell, the center of mass is located at the point (1/2)R from the center of the full sphere. However, for a solid hemisphere, the center of mass is located at (3/8)R from the center of the full sphere. This was pointed out by one of the readers and I appreciate him for this correction. Somehow I have been assuming that the center of mass of a sold hemisphere at rest was at (1/2)R just like that of a hemisphere, which is not correct.

In the case of a fast rotating black hole, I have a serious doubt that the core of the galactic center will be spherical. It will be more or less like a two superposed funnels with long protrusions at the poles with a wider rim at the equator. The reason for this is because the equatorial plane at the rim will be bombarded by the incoming debris due to the dipole gravity force which is strong and relatively short ranged compared to the Newtonian gravity. The balance point will be achieved where the centrifugal force becomes equal to the dipole gravity plus the Newtonian gravity.

In the absence of the strong dipole gravity, a non-rotating stellar object will assume a spherical symmetry, naturally, due to the isotropic nature of the Newtonian gravity.

However, in the case where the dipole gravity is strong, the spherical symmetry will be broken and the shape of the fast rotating stellar object will assume a topology which conforms to the overall dipole gravity force lines, which is basically like a two superposed funnels attached face to face. The elongated shapes of the both of the polar axis can be anticipated due to the collision of the ejected matters and the incoming stream of particles which will eventually settle down in balance.

So, it is interesting to see how the Kerr metric for the rotating black hole has to be modified in this particular geometry, since the spherical symmetry was assumed in the original Kerr metric.

Thermodynamics and Dipole Gravity

The spontaneous acceleration of the gravitational dipole moment in the matter filled universe is inconsistent with the well known laws of thermodynamics. That is, you can not create energy from nothing. Although this is a fundamental problem with dipole gravity, it must be noted that thermodynamics is valid in a closed system where the particles (molecules) that carry the energy is strictly confined within the well insulated container. The fact that dipole gravity can explain the cosmological problems of the jets and the dark matter problem prompts us to reexamine the laws of thermodynamics in light of the new long range force of gravity.

As stated previously, the hypothesis of the existence of the tachyonic particles as a medium for the gravity solves this conceptual problem. Gravity is caused by the void in space where the tachyonic particles are restricted, for example, due to the massive dense stellar material. This is not even a new idea because there has already been a speculation that gravity may be caused by pushing effect, which pushing gravity originally proposed by Le Sage. In any case, the tachyonic nature of these particles makes them easy to pass through the baryonic matter. The cross section between the neutrinos and the ordinary matter is extremely small, which means that there is no effective means of shielding gravity. The gravity, whether it's dipole or Newtonian gravity, can not be contained nor shielded. It is inherently an open system. Therefore, the conventional thermodynamics can not apply. In fact, in this picture, the energy is not created from nothing. It is merely siphoned out of the vast reservoir of the cosmic background energy due to the inherently open nature of the local gravitational system.

This is a drastic departure from the well cherished belief of the local energy conservation from the known thermodynamics. One can see the long reaching consistency here, from the mysterious nature of the negative mass squared value of the neutrinos to the observational absence of the stationary neutrinos, and its hidden effect on gravity and the elegant explanation of the dipole gravity phenomenon using the concept of the tachyonic neutrinos.

As stated in the previous posts, one can see that the major shift of the scientific paradigm is imminent.

In an interesting twist of the event, the Vatican's chief astronomer has said recently that there may be space beings who are also created by God. People may laugh at this idea. There is no mention of the aliens being created in other heavens and earths by God in the Bible. The fact that Vatican had to come up with this idea means a lot. There simply are too many evidences that something or some beings are visiting the Earth. The ultimate collapse of the Catholic Church’s doctrine of the earth being the only heaven and earth created by God must have become a serious issue to the church establishments.

Instead of letting people losing the whole faith on God, Vatican had to prepare for the upcoming revelation of the visitation of the earth by the alien beings. God created many intelligent beings following his own image in other heavens and earths. So there is nothing to panic and we can keep our faith in God as we are used to.

In fact, the freedom of information act has made it impossible to contain the incriminating evidences of the uninvited visitation of the space beings that have been accumulated over a period of decades.

Now the serious question from scientists is how could they manage to visit us if they are from millions of light years away from us?

If the conventional thermodynamics is not the full account of the laws of the nature, anything is possible. The concept that some advanced space beings may be visiting the Earth is not surprising at all.

Paradigm Shift

When the dipole term in the linearized theory of general relativity was handled in the conventional way, there was an existing paradigm that precludes any possibility of the existence of the antigravity force in the universe. In fact, this concept of the repulsive gravity force has been so far out of touch of the reality of the daily lives that this very term "antigravity" has been a subject of a science fiction or a downright ridicule whoever seriously talks about it.

Even if the name of this blog is dipole antigravity, I avoided using the term as much as possible for this reason. But by all means, dipole gravity is the long range controllable antigravity force and there is no doubt about it. It is a purely mechanical means to create antigravity force which is at the core of the theory of dipole gravity. And this has been shown to be the cause of the jets and the dark matter problems. The irony of the matter is that general relativity had it since the beginning.

It is not a new theory in a sense yet profoundly new in other.

It was hidden behind the enigma of the Lense-Thirring force. The main reason this can not be understood is not because it is difficult or based on faulty logic. It is because human mind is not always logical and its inner workings depends strongly on the prevailing paradigm. It is hard to imagine explaining the cosmological problems without invoking this force.

In the world where the hunting was the main source of food supply, the agriculture would be a difficult concept to understand for people as a way of providing food source in ancient times. The biblical record of Cain and Abel may represent this kind of the turn of event. The agriculture dominated the hunting and nomadic culture.

Farming culture represented by Cain replaced the nomadic culture represented by Abel. Whether God liked it or not is not the issue. The world has profoundly changed because of this "discovery" of the concept of farming.

Would the discovery of "antigravity" have the same effect?

Absolutely!!!!

This is the beginning of the new civilization. The earth bound civilization is going to be replaced by the space bound civilization. The theory of dipole gravity has such a potential for huge changes and impact on our lives.

How Lense-Thirring force can be derived from dipole gravity?

LIGO, LISA and Dipole Gravity

There can be many reasons that the researchers in the field can not come forward to comment on the theory of dipole gravity. For the most part, I think there are serious liability issues. Namely, who is responsible for the waste of the billions of tax payers money on LIGO and LISA project when the test proves negative on the detection of the gravitational waves?

Even though the noise issue is a serious one at the moment, it is hard to believe that the experts in the field did not anticipate such a large magnitude of vibration compared to the possible signal. Because this analysis should have been the first step to perform before even start considering an experiment of such a gargantuan scale. You can't tell the general public, after spending billions dollars of the hard earned tax payer's money "by the way, the noise level is much greater than expected, so we can not tell if there really was gravitational wave detected or not, but there is an easy way to test general relativity, it is called "dipole gravity" proposed by Dr. Eue J Jeong". How irresponsible would that be? How stupid would that sound to the general public?

Somebody may have to go to jail. But then they will try everything to avoid such a harsh reality. One of the things they have to do would be to avoid any discussions about the theory of dipole gravity. It would be a death nail for their(misguided) project, reputation, academic prestige once it becomes a public knowledge that the more easy and direct way to test general relativity has been available and presented in the well known journal since 1999. But in fact, in the age of the World Wide Web and the wide spread of the information through Internet, people in the field already have found out the significance of dipole gravity and its far reaching consequences.

The other day, Hawking presented his recent view on cosmology in CSPAN and no one seemed to be impressed by his rendition after many revisions of his "calculations".

It must be noted that there is not a single prediction out of quantum gravity that has been verified in the laboratory. There are published papers indicating that the quantum particles do not seem to show the gravitational interaction individually which are very significant findings but never made it to the attention of the large number of the public.

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.