WHY SUCH DEVELOPMENTS OF SUCH NEW PHYSICS ARE BETTER THAN THE CURRENT PHYSICS? MORAL AND ETHICAL ISSUES OF THE MODERN PHYSICS. TRANSPORATIONS AND RENEWABLE ENERGY MODELS.
It is obvious now through this paper why the axioms of Einstein’s special relativity in an utterly unfortunate way prohibited theoretically the existence of the constituent particles of the fieldmatter (μp+ μe- μn0) (because they also travel faster than the light) and thus all the Navier-Stokes equations of the unified fieldmatter and electrogravity that would lead to the solar energy of Tesla and the fieldmatter propulsion could not be discovered theoretically. Instead the Einsteins special relativity was used in the Nuclear energy and Nuclear propulsion. This is very unfortunate because Einstein himself was against the nuclear power and energy and in favor of the renewable energy.
PHYSICAL THEORY | DERIVED TECHNOLOGY |
Special Relativity and Quantum Mechanics | Nuclear energy, Nuclear propulsion |
Unified fieldmatter (electrogravity) | Tesla’s free solar energy, Electromagnetic propulsion, medicine through fieldmatter sound frequencies |
It is important to realize also that the current unifying Navier-Stokes equations that any physicist is somehow obliged to apply once he realizes the physical ontology (namely the fieldmatter) behind the electromagnetic and gravitational fields do not give direct recipes for derived technological devices. The main reason is that the force terms in the complete non-linear equations of the coupling and interaction of fieldmatter and molecular matter are undetermined and their exact for has to be discovered with experiments.
Nevertheless the whole approach in this paper is revealing and enlightening and remains in the future generations of experimental physicist to discover the relevant technology, solve the CO2 problem of the planet and bring humanity to the next model of transportation through fieldmatter propulsion.
SPECULATE ABOUT HHO TOO AND WATER TREATMENTS.
The unified theory in this article is not based on new inventions of mathematics but deeper perception of well-known and simple physical material ontology
THE UNFYING REALITY OF FIEKDMATTER (GAS) | THE INTERACTIONS THAT ARE UNIFIED |
CHARGED FIELDMATTER | ELECTROMAGNETISM |
HEAT NEUTRAL FIELDMATTER PHENOMENA | GRAVITATION |
FLUID DYNAMICS PHENOMENA OF NEUTRAL FIELDMATTER | WEAK INERTIAL INTERCATIONS |
1) Child mortality, disappearance, and slavery.The 7 main problems of humanity now are:
2) Overpopulation
3) Outdated nutrition model based on animal tyranny or animal slavery.
4) Degradation and destruction of the ecological biosphere.
5) Outdated energy model with high CO2 emmissions.
6) Climate crisis based on CO2 emissions.
7) Over-monetization of life and a monetary system, centrally controlled in a non-democratic way from central banks and commercial banks that have the privilege to issue and create money from nothing without the democratic public approval and create periodically destruction of the economy by debt crisis.
8) Brutal or subtly hidden tyranny
A LIST ADVANTAGES OF THE CURRENT APPROACH COMPARED TO OLDER PHYSCAL THEORIES LIKE SPECIAL AND GENERAL REALTIVITY AND MAXWELLS ELECTROMAGNETISM.
0) At least the same experimental verifications
1) More comprehensive physical material ontology
2) Many well-known solutions to Navier-Stokes with various types of symmetries
3) Simpler mathematics
4) More and surprising predictions and resolutions of paradoxes (like a) Tesla renewable energy and 7 other major inventors, b) The weak neutral light or fieldmatter sound c) That 30% of the earths gravitation and inertial mass is due to the heating by solar radiation at 1-2 Terahertz infrared etc.)
5) No planetary CO2 problem
6) New fieldmatter propulsion safer than the nuclear propulsion
7) Simpler and smarter technology of renewable energy
8) Since solar renewable energy from the fieldmater (gravitational and electromagnetic) is at significantly lower cost (even lower than coal’s cost) and as also this form is not capital intensive, it is the number one candidate to develop and deal with the CO2 emissions and climate crisis on earth.
I am also in favor of shorting the gap between academic science and groups (military or business industrial) that practice applications of similar devices without the adequate academic scientific covering of them.
I am in favor of discovering only what we can apply for the good of all versus applying whatever we can discover.
Overpopulation peak and the new energy models:
The charts of the increase of the global population in the planet, suggest, from a simple logistic-curve best-fit, that it is quite probable that the peak of the population in the planet, can be in the time interval between the next 60 years and the next 2 centuries or more. We remarked about the fact that the groups in power in the various societies have not yet solved the problems of the old energy models. The failure to develop in the universities, and industries, the new energy models, as alternatives to oil and nuclear energy, before the population peak in the planet, might have, as I speculate, grave consequences, in relation to the developments in the humanity after the population peak. I think that the more these, new energy models, are understood and developed, the more, the distribution of the resources in the planet shall be fair, humanly meaningful, and the more, peace, democracy and intelligence shall prevail in humanity. Without this perspective, in the human civilization, life in humanity and the planet after the population peak, might be seriously threaten, due to unbearable differences in wealth, energy resources, technology differences, increased mutual hate, terrorism, and despair. Therefore, it is critical that such new energy models should most probably be developed, before the population peak, and this should happen with the right procedures and the global scientific consensus.
I consider that I follow the strategy of I. Newton in “Principia Mathematica” when formulating and presenting the new physics. In other words Newton formulated his universal attraction in classical Euclidean geometry and not in his new invented differential and integral calculus, otherwise it would be easily and widely understood. It was much later that it was reformulated in his symbolic differential and integral calculus
Similarly I formulate the new physics in the classical differential and integral calculus that involves the infinite as everybody is familiar with it and in my newly discovered natural or digital differential and integral calculus which avoids the infinite (see [Kyritsis C……] . But it is obvious that given sufficient time and acceptance the unifying NS-equations can be reformulated in the natural or digital differential and integral calculus which is by far more fair , exact , and with a mathematical ontology closer to the physical ontology.
CONCLUSIONS
In this outline we indicated how to 1) model the classical fields of gravitation and electromagnetism as fieldmatter 2) Correct and unify the equations of classical Maxwell electromagnetism and Newtonian gravitation , while abandoning the Einstein’s gravitation 3) Re-derive the special relativity formulae, as good approximations under special conditions but without the axioms of relativity or that nothing goes faster than light 4) Speculate about solar renewable energy possible to extract from the gravitational field either directly or through the electromagnetic field and electromagnetic devices and the existence new electromagnetic fieldmatter propulsion devices. This would be the true theoretical source of the solution of the global planetary CO2 problem .
I believe that social functions reflect the individual’s functions and vice versa. So a social situation where, inventors discover phenomena, that “ruin” the conventional academic theories, and in addition other social groups rush in to demanding applications of the older academic discoveries (both military or business industrial groups) , without ecological and global considerations, do create serious problems.
It is like an individual that is acting without having the ability to think about what he is doing, or an individual that is jeopardized and his work is used for objectives opposite of his original intentions. As any problem, the cure requires first realization that it is a problem, then detection of its causes, taking action about it and finally communicating with others about it, thus socializing concepts and solutions.
Should we talk about the present situation in the sciences and technology as a syndrome of a “Soulless Science?”, and jeopardy of collective consciousness of scientific groups? There may be certainly some serious points in having such a concept as the above. Especially as the spirit and social status of those that have given the main ideas in the sciences, is far away from the spirit of those that have chosen the applications, and still far away from the spirit and social status of those that apply them. We could reverse of course the attitude, and raise a question if it might be possible at all to have the effect of increase of the level of consciousness and social maturity of individuals, by using the technology that sciences can provide. The best I can think of such a reverse process that could cure the syndrome of the “Soulless Science?” is through, the computer science and the new era of telecommunications (mobiles, “Society of Information” etc). Individuals do find a support to improve, their concepts, quality of emotions, human relations etc, through, the implementation of the Internet, and the communicators (mobiles etc). There is no doubt also that the implementation of scientific methods in Medicine and Wellness does help too, a lot.
Let us hope that this new science shall help to reverse, the dangerous syndromes, that the applications of the older sciences like physics, and chemistry have created in the societies.
Such new physics as the previous, of energy conversion and electromagnetic propulsion and of the neutral field-gas fluid dynamic effects, have at least four positive elements:
1) Propulsion and Peace: A way out and close to the planet , with more efficient technology than the rockets technology that might reduce the problem of mutual aggressiveness of nations due to overpopulation and scarce resources.
2) Energy conversion and peace: A more fair distribution of the energy resources (as renewable energies) among the national economies, and the continents that may reduce the power controversies and wars, between nations, suppliers and consumers and overcome the necessity of propagation of nuclear power with all its dangers. Starting with Solar and other soft environmental energy from wind, daily temperature changes of the water, and sea waves, we might proceed with electric energy from the potential energy of the new gravitational field (and new electromagnetic field) as renewable energy, and with even lower priority, if at all, from nuclear power (as alternative to traditional from oil, coal , gas etc) . Since renewable energy from the field (gravitational and electromagnetic) is at significantly lower cost (even lower than coal’s cost) and as also this form is not capital intensive, it is the number one candidate to develop and deal with the CO2 emissions and climate crisis.
3) Desirability? A combination of the 1) and 2) as it seems in the future might reduce some of the troubles inside the planet and we may hope that it shall not create new problems to what is outside the planet.
4) Medicine: The role of the flow of the neutral field-gas (layer –1, (or in the positive counting 4)), around the living cells, may give new methods in Medicine for the cure of the cancer, or new healing methods in general and possibly a better explanation of the effects of Chinese acupuncture.
5) Dangers: As far as the present physical insights remain only in the classical fields macroscopic level and not at the quantum scale level, and what is really used in practice is only new mathematical equations for the gravitational, electromagnetic and new neutral field, with just new and more potentials, that correspond to the new experimental discoveries, then the practice seems safe and in fact a lot safer than quantum physics, and nuclear power. But this is, I think, so, only if they are developed at the macroscopic classical fields scale. Neither the present heuristics should be used to change, for the time being, any of the axioms or standard formulations of Quantum Mechanics.
On the other hand we should not fail to realize the importance and dangers of the involved consequences.
The transportation model suggested by this new physics, even if powered also with traditional forms of energy, would permit us to convert traveling hours to traveling minutes, within the planet, and would easily lead us around the planet in a way that the rockets technology compared to this transportation, would seem like the technology of steam engine trains, compared to airplanes. This step in the developments is from an ecological point of view much safer as it seems, compared to the energy technology step. Nevertheless it is apparent that it increases the gap of first-world and third world countries.
The new energy model suggested by this new physics, strictly speaking is indispensable, only for long range space-traveling, outside the planet.
Nevertheless if applied inside the planet, it requires an international ecological-sensitive regulation. It should be remarked that it is certainly safer than the nuclear energy and of significant lower engineering profile, that would make it of interest, practically to every nation, reducing the differences in the use of energy between first and third world countries. Europe is obviously highly interested in it, as it is the first world continent with the highest dependence on energy sources outside it. But it should also be remarked that it is not really much more safer than the traditional energy model with the CO2 emissions, as it requires more ecological maturity than what we already prove that we have. Humanity can chose to control first the CO2 emissions , through the development of the Hydrogen energy model and other classical soft forms of energy (like solar energy, energy from the wins, and energy from the sea waves), which for the moments has economic disadvantages or can proceed to reduce the CO2 emissions, through the oxyhydrogen energy model and of the above electric generators that extract energy from the gravitational field of the solar system, which is economically more attractive. As it seems for the moment (2002) what is followed is the slow way of the first choice. The second choice seems as if that it will follow conditionally and later. The difference is that the second is economically more attractive (it also permits energy independence of households outside the electric grid) and also permits transportation beyond the boundaries of the planet, while the first does not.But obviously we should learn first not to be dangerous to ourselves and not to be dangerous to the greater environment of the planet, the solar system and beyond, before the new freedom of humanity is to occur. A freedom that does not have us obligatory on the surface of the planet (grounded and in quarantine as some would say) or make us move in vehicles (cars) only in contact with the ground (like snakes as some would say). There is a vast number of beautiful things in this planet, but their value is better felt if the freedom to travel outside the planet is a reality too.
Hydrogen model of energy and this form of energy: It is been discussed that the new technology in the industry of cars and transportation, shall be the use of hydrogen. The Brown's gas is a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen directly obtained from electrolysis of water (oxyhydrogen) . It is reported that extra calories "free" energy are obtained e.g. in heating metals . Also the energy used for special types of resonant electrolysis if appropriate set, is less that the energy obtained! The most plausible is that it is subtracted from the perpetual motion of the protons, neutrons, electrons of hydrogen, of oxygen, but also from the local gravitational field. So it , seems to me that at least partly comes from the same reservoir of the present's paper "free energy generators". In other words from the heat of the neutral field-gas, or again in other words from the potential energy of the gravitational field of the planet. Obviously the physics of the Hydrogen model are easier to understand and also simpler to develop, nevertheless, they are not really convenient for transportation outside the planet. In my opinion the oxyhydrogen energy model should start developing directly and with priority to the hydrogen model, and to the above electric devices that extract energy from the potential energy of gravitational field, as it a smaller step in the same direction and requires less changes in fundamental physics. .
Rocket's Space propulsion technology and the new electromagnetic propulsion.
It seems to me that it is obvious that the new electromagnetic propulsion is way superior to the present rocket's propulsion for space transportation.
It is not only that the spaceship does not have to carry huge volume of fuel, but also in the return in the planets atmosphere, does not have to be a free fall that leads to such high temperatures of the surface of the spaceship by friction. The entrance in the atmosphere can be controlled in speed and direction. Thus the main source of well known tragic accidents of the space-busses can be eliminated. From some point of view rocket's propulsion might be appropriate for destructive war objectives but is hardly appropriate for transportation as it is bound to the problem of high temperatures by friction at the free fall in the atmosphere. We may parallel it with an even more insisting and clumsy attempt than to try to fly a propeller airplane with a steam engine of the 19th century. In spite the admirable sophisticated engineering developed in rocket's space propulsion technology, the overall intelligent assessment of this method to an alternative based on the new electromagnetism propulsion, should favor definitely the later.
Still, we should not be naïve about the troubles ahead that should be dealt, with such an energy model. Greedy, global and for a long time (of many centuries) extraction of energy from the heat of field-gas (an energy resource of the planet that may be renewable according to the law like geothermic energy, but again like the geothermic energy it is non-renewable from the point of view of the planet.) without regulation with international laws, would bring even deeper effects in the life of the planet than what the emissions of CO2 of the old energy model, have brought. (Namely changes in the climate). A weakening or strengthening of the gravitational field of the planet would have effects in the falling of the rain, the climate, and the probabilities and frequencies of earthquakes and volcano explosions. Nevertheless such speculations might simply be unrealistic and the fluctuations in the gravitational attraction in practice not significantly affected by the above energy extraction , given that the potential energy of gravitation in the above analysis is replenished from the molecular heat of magma of the planet, and given the incoming energy from the sun. All of these are vastly larger than all the energy needs of all of humanity Besides the present state of the climate crisis requires ability to stop the overheating of the planet. Still all these speculative dangers are less than the present use or propagation of use of nuclear power. There is a limit of power per square kilometer , for this form of energy, (it could be called natural power density constant P0 of the planet earth, at its surface ) that when the extraction is less than that limit we only take advantage of the heat that would be lost anyway, and push and distribute the diminishing results to effects away from the planet. But if the extraction is higher than this limit then we might consider that we “force” the energy resource, quickening the natural cooling of the planet, if we do not account for the incoming energy of the sun. This constant is of similar meaning as the constant of the solar energy (solar constant: 1340 watts/per square meter).Obviously extraction of energy in such a way from places outside the planet, e.g. closer to the sun, is safer, may be considered safely renewable, and it is simply an other form of solar energy, that converts in to electricity the potential energy of the gravitational field of the sun. Before a massive use of this form of energy is implemented, a thorough analysis and experimental study of its properties should be carried out, together with proposals for an ecologically mature and friendly regulation of it.
The author is not in favor of global, fast applications of the possibilities that open with the new physics, before the wider groups of scientist have worked out and elaborated in sufficient quality and reliability the mathematical and physical details of the new physics. First we must know how to think and account with appropriate mathematics, about such newly discovered phenomena, with continuity of sufficient historical depth but also with innovation relative to the evolution of ideas in physics, before we are to know how to get useful results. By simulating first the phenomena with mathematics in computer experiments we can chose what to discover and what is useful for all.
I am also in favor of shorting the gap between academic science and groups (military or business industrial) that practice applications of similar devices without the adequate academic scientific covering of them
I am in favor of discovering only what we can apply for the good of all versus applying what ever we can discover.
From this point of view, energy from the sun , the wind and the sea waves, is simpler to understand, and has also the properties of fair, renewable equidistribution, at least, at a zone of altitudes on the planet. It seems that the in the new age, the renewable forms of production of electric and mechanical energy, may be a prevailing characteristic, and may very well replace the need of the propagation of the nuclear power, in many nations with all the dangers that this may contain.
Overpopulation peak and the new energy models:
The charts of the increase of the global population in the planet, suggest, from a simple logistic-curve best-fit, that it is quite probable that the peak of the population in the planet, can be in the time interval between the next 60 years and the next 2 centuries or more. We remarked about the fact that the groups in power in the various societies have not yet solved the problems of the old energy models. The failure to develop in the universities, and industries, the new energy models, as alternatives to oil and nuclear energy, before the population peak in the planet, might have, as I speculate, grave consequences, in relation to the developments in the humanity after the population peak. I think that the more these, new energy models, are understood and developed, the more, the distribution of the resources in the planet shall be fair, humanly meaningful, and the more, peace, democracy and intelligence shall prevail in humanity. Without this perspective, in the human civilization, life in humanity and the planet after the population peak, might be seriously threaten, due to unbearable differences in wealth, energy resources, technology differences, increased mutual hate, terrorism, and despair. Therefore it is critical that such new energy models should most probably be developed, before the population peak, and this should happen with the right procedures and the global scientific consensus.
It seems better ,of course to visualize and work for the positive aspects of the new perspectives for the new millennium but also to try ourselves in solving the problems already accumulated with the old technologies.
It seems that we do not live in a true democracy. It seems that it is a hijcaked democracy or a crypto-tyrannical-oligrachy behind a theatrical democracy. And this is not so for one, but for many countries.One gets the feeling as if this planetary scale crypto-oligarchy has become the vehicle of an alien monstrous intention of destroying the major part of humanity , in a way that it seems that it was by environment neglecting, over-population mutual aggressiveness, financial over-debt etc., so that finally the remaining humanity becomes enslaved to this monstrous alien intention. It is therefore imperative that we try to correct this.
is the second viscosity.
= Pressure
= Temperature
= Gas constant for the specific gas
is a constant, neither does it deal with the uniqueness of the Navier–Stokes equations with respect to any turbulence properties.) It is also worth pointing out that the components of the velocity vector are exactly those from the Pythagorean quadruple parametrization. Other choices of density and pressure are possible with the same velocity field: