Since, in three dimensions, all energy eventually
"degrades" to random motions -- via Kelvin and Gibb's 19th Century Laws
of Thermodynamics (it's called "increasing entropy") -- "stress energy"
of the aether (vacuum) released inside a material object, even if it
initially appears in a coherent form -- driving, for instance, the anomalous
(1400 mile-per-hour!), planet-girdling winds of distant Neptune's "jet
streams" -- will eventually degrade to simple, random heat ... ultimately
radiated away as "excess infrared emissions" into space. It's the initial,
astrophysical conditions under which such "Maxwellian space potentials"
can be released inside a planet (or a star ...), that have been the
central focus of our efforts for ten years --
To create a predictive, mathematical "hyperdimensional model" of
such physics.
The entire question comes down to--
"What set of known spatial conditions will slowly, predictably,
release the potential strains of 4-space into 3-space' ... inside
a massive world ... so that when this energy inevitably degrades to
heat, its radiative signature identifies the original hyperdimensional'
source?"
Fortunately, we are surrounded by almost half a dozen
examples close at hand: the giant, "anomalously radiating" planets of
this solar system (and some major moons). Over the past decade,
as we have attempted to understand their anomalous IR radiation, one
thing has become clear -- to a first order, the "infrared excesses"
of the giant planets all seem to correlate very nicely with one parameter
each has in common -- regardless of their individual masses, elemental
compositions, or distance from the Sun:
Their total system "angular momentum."
The mass of a body and the rate at which it spins, in classical
physics, determines an object's "angular momentum." In our Hyperdimensional
Model, its a bit more complicated -- because objects apparently separated
by distance in this (3-space) dimension are in fact connected
in a "higher" (4-space) dimension; so, in the HD model, one also adds
in the orbital momentum of an object's gravitationally-tethered satellites
-- moons in the case of planets; planets, in the case of the Sun, or
companion stars in the case of other stars.
When one graphs the
total angular momentum of a set of objects -- such as the
radiating outer planets of this solar system (plus Earth and Sun) --
against the total amount of internal energy each object radiates to
space, the results are striking:
The more total system angular momentum a planet
(or any celestial body) possesses (as defined above -- object plus satellites),
the greater its intrinsic "brightness," i.e. the more "anomalous
energy" it apparently is capable of "generating."
And, as can be seen from this key diagram, this striking
linear dependence now seems to hold across a range of luminosity and
momentum totaling almost three orders of magnitude ... almost
1000/1!
Especially noteworthy, the Earth (not "a collapsing gas
giant," by any stretch of the imagination) also seems to fit precisely
this empirical energy relationship: when the angular momentum of the
Moon is added to the "spin momentum" of its parent planet, the resulting
correlation with measurements derived from internal "heat budget" studies
of the Earth are perfectly fitted to this solar-system-wide
empirical relationship -- even though the Earth's internal energy
is supposedly derived from "radioactive sources."
And, as can be seen from the accompanying
historical comparison, this striking solar system linear relationship
is actually more tightly constrained (even at this early stage) than
the original Hubble "redshift data" supporting the Big Bang!
This discovery contains major implications, not
only for past geophysics and terrestrial evolution
... but for future geological and climatological events
-- "Earth changes," as some have termed them.
These may be driven, not by rising solar interactions
or by-products of terrestrial civilization (accumulating
"greenhouse gases" from burning fossil fuels), but by
this same "hyperdimensional physics." If so, then
learning a lot more about the mechanisms of this physics
-- and quickly! -- is a critical step toward intervening
and eventually controlling our future well-being, if not
our destiny, on (and off!) this planet ...
For the "Hyperdimensional Physics" model, this simple
but powerful relationship now seems to be the equivalent of Relativity's
E=MC2 : a celestial object's total internal luminosity seems dependent
upon only one physical parameter:
L=mr2 = total system angular momentum (object, plus all satellites)
There is a well-known "rule of thumb" in science, perhaps
best expressed by a late Noble Laureate, physicist Richard Feynman:
"You can recognize truth by its beauty and simplicity.
When you get it right, it is obvious that it is right -- at least
if you have any experience -- because usually what happens is that
more comes out than goes in ... The inexperienced, the crackpots,
and people like that, make guesses that are simple, but you can
immediately see that they are wrong, so that does not count. Others,
the inexperienced students, make guesses that are very complicated,
and it sort of looks as if it is all right, but I know it is not
true because the truth always turns out to be simpler that you thought
..."
This startling relationship -- our discovery of the simple
dependence of an object's internal luminosity on its total system angular
momentum -- has that "feel" about it; it is simple ... it is elegant
... in fact--
It could even be true.
But, as can be seen from examining the luminosity/angular momentum diagram
again, there also appears to be one glaring exception to this otherwise
strikingly linear relationship:
The Sun itself.
Independent research, involving over 30 years of attempted
confirmation of the Sun's basic energy source -- in the form of solar/terrestrial
observations of tiny atomic particles called "neutrinos," supposedly
coming from the center
of the Sun -- have left laboratory physicists and astrophysicists
with a major astronomical enigma:
The Sun is not emitting anything like the number
of neutrinos required by the "Standard Solar Model" for its observed
energy emission; if its energy is due to "thermo-nuclear reactions"
(as the Standard Model demands), then the observed "neutrino
deficit" is upwards of 60%: even more remarkable, certain kinds of primary
neutrinos (calculated as required to explain the bulk of the solar interior's
fusion reactions, based on laboratory measurements) turn out to be simply
missing altogether!
So -- what really fuels the Sun?
The answer to the Sun's apparent violation of the Standard
Solar Model -- ironically, is contained in its striking "violation"
of our key angular
momentum/luminosity diagram:
In the Hyperdimensional Model, the Sun's primary energy
source -- like the planets' -- must be driven by its total angular momentum
-- its own "spin momentum," plus the total angular momentum of
the planetary masses orbiting around it. Any standard astronomical text
reveals that, though the Sun contains more than 98% of the mass of the
solar system, it contains less than 2% of its total angular momentum.
The rest is in the planets. Thus, in adding up their total contribution
to the Sun's angular momentum budget -- if the HD model is correct --
we should see the
Sun following the same line on the graph that the planets, from
Earth to Neptune, do.
It doesn't.
The obvious answer to this dilemma is that the HD model is simply wrong.
The less obvious is that we're missing something ...
Like ... additional planets (above)!
By adding another big planet (or a couple of smaller
ones) beyond Pluto (several hundred times the Earth's
distance from the Sun -- below), we can move the Sun's total
angular momentum to the right on the graph, until it almost intersects
the line (allowing for a percentage, about 30%, of internal energy expected
from genuine thermonuclear reactions ...). This creates the specific
"HD prediction" that "the current textbook tally of the Sun's angular
momentum is deficient because ..."
We haven't discovered all the remaining members of the solar system yet!
As a dividend, this promptly presents us with our first
key test of the Hyperdimensional Model:
1) Find those planets!
The second test of the Hyperdimensional Model is that,
unlike other efforts to explain anomalous planetary energy emissions
via continued "planetary collapse," or "stored primordial heat," the
hyperdimensional approach specifically predicts one radical, definitive
observational difference from all other existing explanations--
2) HD energy generation in both planets and stars should
be -- must be -- variable.
This is simply implicit in the mechanism which generates
the hyperdimensional energy in the first place: ever changing
hyperspatial geometry.
If the ultimate source of planetary (or stellar) energy
is this "vorticular (rotating) spatial stress between dimensions"
(ala Maxwell), then the constantly changing pattern (both gravitationally
and dimensionally) of interacting satellites in orbit around a major
planet/star must modulate that stress pattern as a constantly changing,
geometrically twisted "aether" (ala Whittaker's amplifications
of Maxwell). In our Hyperdimensional Model, it is this "constantly changing
hyperspatial geometry" that is capable (via resonant rotations
with the masses in question -- either as spin, or circular orbital motions)
of extracting energy from this underlying "rotating, vorticular aether"
... and then releasing it inside material objects.
Initially, this "excess energy" can appear in many different forms --
high-speed winds, unusual electrical activity, even enhanced nuclear
reactions -- but, ultimately, it must all degrade to simple "excess
heat." Because of the basic physical requirement for resonance
in effectively coupling a planet (or a star's) "rotating 3-D mass to
the underlying 4-D aether rotation," this excess energy generation must
also, inevitably, vary with time -- as the changing orbital geometry
of the "satellites" interacts with the spinning primary (and
the underlying, "vorticular aether"...) in and out-of-phase.
For these reasons, as stated earlier, time-variability of this
continuing energy exchange must be a central hallmark of this entire
"HD process."
[Incidentally, understanding this basic "hyperdimensional
transfer mechanism," in terms of Maxwell's original quaternions (that
describe "a rotating, vorticular, four-dimensional sponge-like aether"),
immediately lends itself to creating a "Hyperdimensional Technology"
based on this same mechanism.
The fundamental "violations" of current physics exhibited
by so-called "free energy" machines -- from
the explicitly-rotating "N-machine" to the initially frustrating
time-variable aspects of "electro-chemical
cold fusion"-- are now elegantly explained by appropriate application
of Maxwell's original ideas.
Even more extraordinary: the recent startling
demonstration, broadcast nationwide on ABC's "Good Morning America"
last year, of a "physically impossible" major reduction -- in a
few minutes! -- of long-lived radioactive Uranium isotopes. Normally,
such processes require billions of years to accomplish. This
too is now elegantly explained by the Hyperdimensional Model-- As --
an "induced hyperspatial stress," created by the machine ... the same
stress that initially (in the Model) induces "unstable isotopes" in
the first place. By technologically enhancing such vacuum stress within
these nuclei, via a retuning of Maxwell's "scalar potentials,"
the normal radioactive breakdown process is accelerated -- literally
billions of times ...
The implications for an entire "rapid, radioactive nuclear waste
reduction technology" -- accomplishing in hours what would normally
require aeons -- is merely one immediate, desperately needed
world-wide application of such "Hyperdimensional Technologies."]
In our own planetary system, all the "giant" planets
possess a retinue of at least a dozen satellites: one or two major ones
(approximating the size of the planet Mercury) ... with several others
ranging down below the diameter and mass of our own Moon ... in addition
to a host of smaller objects; because of the "lever effect" in the angular
momentum calculations, even a small satellite orbiting far away (or
at a steep angle to the planet's plane of rotation) can exert a disproportional
effect on the "total angular momentum" equation -- just look at Pluto
and the Sun.
Even now, Jupiter's four major satellites (which have collective
masses approximately 1/10,000th of Jupiter itself), during the course
of their complex orbital interactions, are historically known to cause
time-altered behavior in a variety of well-known Jovian phenomena--
Including -- "anomalous" latitude and longitude motions of the
Great Red Spot itself.
As we presented at the U.N.
in 1992, the Great Red Spot -- a mysterious vortex located for over
300 years at that "infamous"
19.5 degrees S. Latitude, via the circumscribed tetrahedral geometry
of the equally infamous "27 line problem" -- is the classic "hyperdimensional
signature" of HD physics operating within Jupiter.
The existence of decades of recorded "anomalous motions"
of this Spot, neatly synchronized with the highly predictable
motions of Jupiter's own moons, are clearly NOT the result of conventional
"gravitational" or "tidal" interactions -- in view of the relatively
insignificant masses of the moons compared to Jupiter itself; but, following
Maxwell and Whittaker, the hyperdimensional effects of these same
moons -- via the long "lever" of angular momentum on the constantly
changing, vorticular scalar stress potentials inside Jupiter
-- that is a very different story ...
So, Hyperdimensional Test number three:
3) Look for small, short-term amplitude-variations
in the infrared emission levels of all the giant planets ...
synchronized (as are the still-mysterious motions of the GRS on Jupiter)
with the orbital motions and conjunctions of their moons.
All NASA models for the "anomalous energy emissions"
of these planets have assumed a steady output; the "snapshot"
values derived from the mere few hours of Voyager fly-bys in
the 1980's are now firmly listed in astronomy texts as new "planetary
constants"; the reason: the emissions are viewed by NASA as either "primordial
heat," stored across the aeons; energy release from internal long-term
radioactive processes; or literal, slight settling of portions
of the entire planet, still releasing gravitational potential energy
... all processes that will not change perceptibly even in thousands
of years!
Confirmed short-term variations in the current
planetary IR outputs, of "a few hours" (or even a few days) duration
-- and synchronized with the orbital periods of the planets'
satellites themselves -- would thus be stunning evidence that all
the "mainstream" explanations are in trouble ... and that the Hyperdimensional
Model deserves much closer scrutiny ...
In this same vein: unlike all "conventional NASA explanations,"
in a phenomenon akin to "hyperdimensional astrology," the HD model also
specifically predicts significantly larger, long-term variability in
these major planetary IR outputs ... of several years duration.
These (like the shorter variations triggered by the changing geometry
between the satellites) should be caused by the constantly changing
hyperdimensional (spatial stress) interactions between the
major planets themselves ... as they continually change their geometry
relative to one another, each orbiting the Sun with a different relative
velocity.
These changing interactive stresses in the "boundary
between hyperspace and real' space" (in the Hyperdimensional Model)
now also seem to be the answer to the mysterious "storms" that, from
time to time, have suddenly appeared in the atmospheres of several of
the outer planets. The virtual "disappearance," in the late 80's, of
Jupiter's Great Red Spot is one remarkable example; Saturn's
abrupt production of a major planetary "event," photographed by the
Hubble Space Telescope in 1994 as a brilliant cloud erupting at
19.5 degrees N. (where else?!), is yet another.
Since the prevailing NASA view is that these planets'
"excess" IR output must be constant over time, no one has bothered
to look for any further correlations -- between a rising or falling
internal energy emission ... and the (now, historically well-documented)
semi-periodic eruptions of such "storms."
They should.
