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 naïve.

"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).