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.

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.

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

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.

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).

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.

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".