IST discussion

Subquantum Kinetics: A System Approach to Physics and Cosmology. Paul A. LaViolette
This topic is about Subquantum Kinetics
2 views
More on subquantum kinetics, Part 2: the experimental evidence

Comments Showing 1-1 of 1 (1 new)    post a comment »
dateUp arrow    newest »

message 1: by Rui (last edited Jan 09, 2013 08:31AM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Rui Zambujal (RuiZambujal) | 8 comments And here is Part 2:

Appendix A (continued)
Subquantum Kinetics Predictions
and their Verification


8. Galactic Core Energy Source - prevailing concept (1985): The nuclei of active galaxies and quasars are known to contain central masses ranging from millions to billions of solar masses, and it is assumed that these have collapsed to form black holes. It is further assumed that the prodigious energy output from these cores is powered from matter being swallowed by these hypothesized black holes. No other means of generating energy is known to explain the immense amount of energy observed to come from these locations.


Prediction No. 8 (1985): Subquantum kinetics predicts that matter-accreting black holes do not exist. Instead, it predicts the existence of highly massive, very dense celestial bodies of finite size called "mother stars" which continuously and spontaneously produce matter and genic energy in their interiors. These ideas were published on two occasions: 1985 (IJGS, p. 342) and 1994 (Subquantum Kinetics, 1st ed., pp. 143-144).

Verification (January 1995): Observations made with the Hubble Space Telescope indicate that 11 out of 15 quasars are devoid of any surrounding material and hence have no matter available to power a black hole hypothetically located at their centers. This supports the subquantum kinetics prediction that such energetic sources are instead powered by energy spontaneously created in their interiors.
Verification (September 1997): Hubble Space Telescope observations of the heart of active galaxy NGC 6251 provide further confirmation of the earlier January 1995 verification. These observations show that this galaxy's core is swept clear and hence that there should be no matter available to be accreted by a hypothetical central black hole.


9. Supernova Precursor Stars - prevailing concept (1985): It is conventionally believed that supernovae are produced by red giant stars which have exhausted their supply of nuclear fuel. It is presumed that the once the red giant's nuclear reactions subside, the star collapses and subsequently rebounds as a supernova explosion.

Prediction No. 9 (1985): Subquantum kinetics predicts that supernovae are produced, not by red giant stars, but by blue supergiant stars, that is, by stars that are exceedingly luminous and hence energetically unstable. It predicts that, rather than collapsing, the star undergoes a nonlinear increase in its production of genic energy which leads to a stellar explosion. This prediction was published in 1985 (IJGS, pp. 342-343).

Verification (1987): Supernova 1987A is observed in the Large Magellenic Cloud. This is the closest supernova in the history of modern astronomy. Astronomers locate its precursor star on old photographic plates. Surprisingly, they find that this precursor was a blue supergiant star, contradicting established theory and confirming the subquantum kinetics prediction.

10. Galactic Core Energy Source - prevailing concept (1985): At the time of this prediction, astronomers had not imaged stars in the vicinity of the Galactic center since the observational techniques had not yet been developed. Based on their conventional theories, they expected that most stars in the vicinity of the Galactic center should be low mass stars, which they theorized should be very old stars, at least as old the the Galaxy, e.g., billions of years.

Prediction No. 10 (1985): Subquantum kinetics predicts that massive stars residing in the vicinity of the Galactic center should instead be massive. It proposes the theory that matter is continuously created, that stars grow in size and grow most rapidly in the vicinity of the Galactic center where the gravity potential and matter creation rate is highest. Furthermore subquantum kinetics predicts that massive stars, such as blue supergiants are among the oldest stars and are not young stars as conventional theory predicts. I published this prediction in 1985 (LaViolette, IJGS, pp. 341-342) and again in 1994 (LaViolette, Subquantum Kinetics, 1st ed., pp. 157 - 158). Also see p. 242 (last paragraph) of the second edition of Subquantum Kinetics which describes the expectation that older, more massive stars should reside near a galaxy's core.

Verification (1995): A group of astronomers (Krabbe et al.) publish observations of the Galactic center stellar cluster which indicate that the region within 1-1/2 light-years of the Galactic center is populated with about two dozen luminous helium-rich blue supergiants having masses of up to 100 solar masses. This finding confirms the subquantum kinetics prediction. Unaware of the subquantum kinetics prediction, they have difficulty in accounting for this finding. They speculate that these are young stars which must have formed between 3 and 7 million years ago from gas residing in this region. But they are unable to explain how this would occur since the large tidal shear in this region should have disrupted such a star formation process.
Verification (2003): UCLA astronomer Andrea Ghez reports on observations she has made of the Galactic center using infrared speckle interferometry and adaptive optics. She was able to plot the trajectories of these stars. Based on these observations, she confirms that the stars in the immediate vicinity of the Galactic center, within 0.01 light years, are very massive, but that they have spectra typical of "young" stars (young by the conventional definition). She finds this puzzling since the tidal forces in the vicinity of the Galactic center would be much too strong to allow stars to form through a gravitational accretion process, this being especially true of the eight stars found closest to the Galactic center. She suggests that these massive stars may in fact be old stars whose proximity to the Galactic center has altered their appearance to make them masquerade as young stars. However, she is unable to offer any mechanism by which this could happen. Here we find her coming close to the subquantum kinetics prediction that these stars near the Galactic center should be very massive. However, by following conventional theory, she must resort to proposing mysterious stellar masquerading effects since conventional theory erroneously interprets massive stars to be young stars, instead of old stars. But with subquantum kinetics these massive stars appear exactly as they should, namely as blue supergiants which in this paradigm are very old stars.

11. Gravity wave and Coulomb wave speed and gravity wave force (2003): At the time of this prediction, most physicists and astronomers believed that gravity waves and Coulomb waves should always travel at the speed of light. They also concurred that the force exerted by such waves should scale in proportion to the field gradient.

Prediction No. 11 (2003): Subquantum kinetics predicts that an electron shock discharge should produce coinciding electric and gravity potential waves that travel faster than the speed of light and that the speed of these superluminal waves at any given point in time should depend on the electric potential gradient of the discharge (LaViolette, Subquantum Kinetics, 2nd ed., 2003, p. 130). This is predicted to be due to the movement of the ether wind created by the shocks, the velocity of the pulses being increased by the additional forward velocity of the ether wind reference frame relative to which they propagate. Furthermore subquantum kinetics also predicts that the gravitational force exerted by such shock waves should increase as the pulse's electric potential gradient increases.

Verification (2005 - 2006): I worked with research scientist Guy Obolensky to test this prediction with respect to the speed of electric potential waves. Earlier Obolensky had reported that he had measured the speed of electric shock fronts (Coulomb waves) propagating away from a Dome antenna and found that they traveled at a superluminal speed. Based on prediction 11, I theorized that since the shock front expanded radially outward from its emitting dome antenna, its electric field gradient should decrease inversely with increasing distance from the dome and that the superluminal speed of these shocks should correspondingly decrease inversely with distance from the dome. This prediction was confirmed. They made measurements of the time of flight of the shock pulse to six locations of progressively greater distance from the dome and found that the excess velocity of the shock (v - c) declined inversely with distance just as had been predicted. This experiment is summarized in chapter 6 of my book Secrets of Antigravity Propulsion. It should be mentioned that Tesla also reported that the speed of his pulses began at a near infinite speed at the dome of his antenna and progressively declined toward c as they traveled further away.
Verification (2008): The prediction with respect to the force exerted by the gravity potential component of such waves was verified qualitatively. I contacted Dr. Eugene Podkletnov and inquired about the performance of his gravity impulse beam generator. Previously Drs. Podkletnov and Modanese had reported in a published paper that the impulse beam was able to deflect a test mass up to 14 centimeters when 2 million volts were discharged through the generator's superconducting cathode disc (Podkletnov and Modanese, 2002). Podkletnov had subsequently told me that the beam was able to punch 4 inch holes through concrete blocks when 10 million volt pulses were discharged through the disk. In January 2008, I asked Podkletnov if his team used a different electric pulse generator to produce the gravity pulses that punched holes through concrete blocks as compared with the ones that produced the 14 centimeter pendulum deflections and whether the former used a different Marx capacitor bank that was able to create a pulse with a steeper gradient. Dr. Podkletnov concurred that was indeed the case, the concrete smashing pulses were created with an electric discharge that had a much more rapid voltage rise-time.

Verification (2008): The prediction with respect to the superluminal speed of gravity potential component of such waves was verified qualitatively. Previously, Dr. Podkletnov had told me that he and Dr. Modanese had measured the speed of the pulses to be between 63 and 64 times the speed of light. In January of 2008, I asked Podkletnov whether the concrete smashing pulses produced by the steeper electric field gradients traveled much faster than the pendulum deflecting pulses. Podkletnov concurred and said that they had determined that these stronger pulses traveled at least several thousand times the speed of light.


back to top