For some time, we have been asked to provide an overview of a subject intimately connected with — but not dependent upon — the confirmation of “
intelligent ruins at Cydonia,” on Mars:
The arcane subject of “Hyperdimensional Physics.”
Unknown to most current physicists and students of science (if not the general media and public), the beginnings of modern physics launched over 100 years ago by the so-called “giants” — Helmholtz, Lord Kelvin, Faraday, Maxwell and many others — laid a full and rich tradition in this currently little-known field: the open, heatedly debated scientific and philosophical premise that three-dimensional reality is only a subset of a series of higher, hyperspatial, additional dimensions, which control not only the physics of our very existence, from stars to galaxies to life itself … but potentially, through time-variable changes in its foundations–
Dramatic coming changes in our lives.
This bold theoretical and experimental era, at the very dawn of science as we know it, came to an abrupt end at the close of the 19th Century. That was when our currently accepted (and very different) view of “physics” — everything from the “Big Bang” Expanding Universe Cosmology, to Relativistic limitations imposed by “flat” space and non-simultaneous time, complicated by a non-intuitive “Quantum Mechanics” of suddenly uncertain atomic “realities” — all took a very different turn … from where they had been headed. Imagine our surprise, when — as part of our Enterprise Mission effort to verify the existence of intelligently-created ruins at “Cydonia” — we suddenly realized we might have stumbled across the geometry of this same 19th Century, pre-Relativity “hyperdimensional physics”–
But encoded on a completely separate world!
Even more startling: this “lost science” was — somehow –geometrically memorialized on the same planet … the planet Mars … that may have seen its “end” as a direct result of this same physics …
According to the former Chief of the Celestial Mechanics Branch of the U.S. Naval Observatory, astronomer Thomas Van Flandern, Mars may once having been the satellite of a former major 10th planet of the solar system, that once orbited between current Jupiter and Mars. Sixty-five million years ago, for some currently unknown reason (according to Van Flandern’s 25-year-old theory ) — that planet suddenly exploded–
Releasing Mars into its currently “anomalously elliptical” orbit of the Sun …
With NASA’s recent announcement of the potential discovery of the first “extrasolar, Jovian-class planet” physically detected beyond the confines of our solar system, the timing seemed particularly appropriate to update our original description of “hyperdimensional physics” at the United Nations, in 1992. And to call for some unique tests of this hypothesis, now that extensive new NASA observations of “the planet” are being planned for the next few months.
It is particularly ironic that these same tests could also provide striking new evidence supporting Van Flandern’s 25 year-old “exploding planet hypothesis” …
On May 28, 1998, NASA held the latest in a recent series of unprecedented news conferences in Washington D.C.; the announcement of the first direct detection (as opposed to inferences deduced from “stellar wobbles”) of a possible planet located beyond our local solar system. The discoverer — Dr. Susan Terebey, founder of the “Extrasolar Research Corporation” — serendipitiously located the potential planet while using the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) and the newly-installed “NICMOS” Camera last year to study newly-forming stars.
Officially termed “TMR-1C,” at the announcement NASA press conference Dr. Terebey described her at first slow realization of the uniqueness and potential importance of this “find”; ultimately her attention was drawn to a mere “pinprick of infrared light” in close association (on the Hubble “NICMOS” image — ) with two much brighter stars. Immersed in a dense cloud of interstellar dust, this faint, solitary object — the only other IR source (besides the stars themselves) visible against the dust — was strategically located at the precise end of a long, slender filament of light. Terebey discovered, upon preliminary measurement, that this “filament” extended over a 100 billion miles … directly connecting the “pinprick” with the twin, newborn parent suns.
Several months into her analysis, Terebey reached the tentative conclusion that this tiny “IR speck” was most likely the first Hubble image (if not any image!) of a newborn, runaway giant planet — “recently” ejected from a prior orbit of the nearby stars themselves. From the faint infrared luminosity of this isolated object and contemporary models of planetary formation, Terebey estimated that its mass has to be only “2 to 3 times Jupiter’s.” The “filament,” she theorized, is most likely a “tunnel” literally bored through the dense cloud of surrounding gas and dust by the passage of the ejected planet itself — a tunnel that, acting like a “lightpipe,” is scattering infrared energy down its entire 130 billion-mile length from the nearby stars themselves.
Because Taurus (the celestial region in which these remarkable objects are located) is now behind the Sun as seen from Earth, it will be several months before Hubble can be used to acquire additional data on the “planet.” There are also plans to enlist major ground-based telescopes in this campaign. What is critically needed is spectrascopic data on this object; if it is not merely a misidentified small star (such as a red dwarf, drastically dimmed by the copious dust still swirling in the vicinity of the nearby brighter stars), but is in fact a cooling planet, this will be instantly apparent from its spectrum.
Which brings us to the unique hyperdimensional possibilities this discovery has now presented.
Astrophysical discovery of “glowing planets” — planetary bodies which shine in the infrared via internal energy sources, not just by reflected light — stems from completely unexpected ground-based telescopic observations of this solar system, beginning in the mid-1960’s: the startling detection of “anomalous internal infrared radiation” coming from the planet Jupiter. Later Pioneer and Voyager insitu spacecraft observations across the 70s and 80s added the other “giant planets,” Saturn, Uranus and Neptune, to the list of solar system worlds that — somehow, without internal nuclear fusion processes, like stars — still manage to radiate more energy out into space than they receive directly from the Sun.
After much initial debate, the conventional understanding of these anomalous “infrared excesses” eventually settled on three possible internal sources: 1) left-over “primordial heat” from the literal formation of the planet; 2) heating caused by eventual internal separation of light elements in so-called “gas giant” planets (helium from hydrogen), releasing potential energy as the helium falls further toward the center of the planet (a form of ultra-slow, “continued gravitational contraction”); and 3), anomalous energy release due to excess radioactive decay of heavy element concentrations located within gas giant rocky cores.
Of the three current explanations for these “energy anomalies,” only the first applies to Jupiter … because of its mass — 318 times the Earth’s; a planet of that minimum mass is required (in the model) if it’s to retain significant thermal energy across the immense lifetime of the solar system … almost 5 billion years since the planet’s formation … and still be able to radiate observable heat. And, as can be seen from this diagram, the current ratio of absorbed solar energy to emitted 5-billion-year-old internal Jovian energy is still almost two to one!
After the Voyager fly-bys of the 1980’s, the second “internal heat” proposal — the “helium drip model” — was favored for the observed heat excess in the Saturn situation. But, because of their relatively light masses (less than 30 times the Earth’s), only the third possibility — massive internal radioactive decay — has been seriously attempted as an explanation for Uranus’ and Neptune’s more puzzling “anomalous infrared emissions.”
There are, however, serious problems with all of these “conventional” explanations — particularly after these spacecraft flybys, for all planets less massive than Jupiter.
For instance, during the Voyager encounters of Uranus and Neptune, spacecraft instruments detected a barely measurable (but significant) “infrared excess” (as opposed to merely infrared re-emission of absorbed solar energy) for Uranus of about “1 to 1.14”; whereas for Neptune (essentially its planetary “twin”) the ratio of internal heat to intercepted sunlight was a striking “three to one!”
However, simultaneous “doppler tracking” gravity measurements conducted during the fly-bys (looking for anomalous trajectory changes to the spacecraft motion, caused by gravitational effects from increased percentages of heavy radioactive elements in the cores of Uranus and Neptune) detected no anomalous central concentrations in either planet … necessary, if the excess observed IR radiation is in fact caused by “excessive internal radioactive element concentrations.”
Even more perplexing, Uranus has a pronounced axial tilt (“obliquity” is the technical term) compared to all the other planets of the solar system — some 98 degrees to the plane of its orbit of the Sun; Neptune’s is much more “normal”: about 30 degrees. [For comparison, Earth’s obliquity is about 23.5 degrees]. One recently proposed alternative to the “internal radioactivity model” is “the recent collision model”: that Uranus — somehow, long after its formation — suffered a massive impact with another major object, perhaps an errant moon … This, according to the theorists, in addition to accounting for the current “tipped over situation” of the planet, would have also added a significant amount of geologically “recent” internal energy to Uranus, driving up internal temperatures by equivalent amounts. This model argues that these resulting elevated temperatures in Uranus, derived from a massive “cosmic collision,” could thus account for Uranus’ current “infrared excess,” as observed by Voyager in 1986.
There is only one problem with these ideas: the “excess radioactivity theory,” and the “cosmic collision model” are both apparently dead wrong.
Uranus, with no apparent core concentration of “heavy radioactive elements” (so said Voyager), yet the one solar system planet with an axial “tilt” consistent with a major interplanetary collision — is barely radiating “over unity” at its distance from the Sun (“over unity”= more energy coming out than is going in); Neptune — essentially Uranus’ twin — by striking contrast, and with a perfectly “normal” obliquity, is radiating almost three times more energy “out” than it’s getting from the Sun. When these two planets are “normalized” (i.e., when their differing distances from the Sun are taken into account), their absolute internal “over unity” energy emissions, in fact, are just about the same.
So, based on these “local” solar system observations, there’s apparently something drastically wrong with current astrophysical theories relating to “anomalous internal planetary energy resources” … the same theories that Dr. Susan Terebey and NASA are now relying on to tell them (and us) both the age and mass of her newly-discovered “runaway planet.”
Enter Hyperdimensional Physics.
The cornerstone of the hyperdimensional model (as applied to the problem of “unexplained” astrophysical energy sources) is that historically, there is a perfectly natural explanation for such “anomalous energy” appearing in celestial bodies … which, unfortunately, hasn’t been seriously considered by Science for over 100 years:
The existence of unseen hyperspatial realities … that, through information transfer between dimensions, are the literal “foundation substrate” maintaining the reality of everything in this dimension.
The mathematical and physical parameters required for such “information/energy gating” into this spatial dimension from potential “n-dimensions” were primarily founded in the pioneering work of several 19th Century founders of modern mathematics and physics: among these, German mathematician Georg Riemann; Scottish physicist Sir William Thompson (who would eventually be Knighted by the British Crown as “Baron Kelvin of Largs” for his scientific and technological contributions); Scottish physicist James Clerk Maxwell; and British mathematician Sir William Rowan Hamilton.
In 1867 Thompson, following decades of inquiry into the fundamental properties of both matter and the space between, proposed a radical new explanation for the most fundamental properties of solid objects — the existence of “the vortex atom.” This was in direct contradiction to then prevailing 19th Century theories of matter, in which atoms were still viewed as infinitesimal “small, hard bodies [as] imagined by [the Roman poet] Lucretius, and endorsed by Newton …” Thompson’s “vortex atoms” were envisioned, instead, as tiny, self-sustaining “whirlpools” in the so-called “aether” — which Thompson and his 19th Century contemporaries increasingly believed extended throughout the Universe as an all-pervasive, incompressible fluid.
Even as Thompson published his revolutionary model for the atom, Maxwell, building on Thompson’s earlier explorations of the underlying properties of this “aetheric fluid,” was well on the way to devising a highly successful “mechanical” vortex model of the “incompressible aether” itself, in which Thompson’s vortex atom could live — a model derived in part from the laboratory-observed elastic and dynamical properties of solids. Ultimately, in 1873, he would succeed in uniting a couple hundred years of electrical and magnetic scientific observations into a comprehensive, overarching electromagnetic theory of light vibrations … carried across space by this “incompressible and highly stressed universal aetheric fluid …”
Maxwell’s mathematical basis for his triumphant unification of these two great mystery forces of 19th Century physics were “quaternions” — a term invented (adopted would be a more precise description) in the 1840s by mathematician Sir William Rowan Hamilton, for “an ordered pair of complex numbers” (quaternion = four). Complex numbers themselves, according to Hamilton’s clarifications of long-mysterious terms such as “imaginary” and “real” numbers utilized in earlier definitions, were nothing more than “pairs of real numbers which are added or multiplied according to certain formal rules.” In 1897, A.S. Hathaway formally extended Hamilton’s ideas regarding quaternions as “sets of four real numbers” to the idea of four spatial dimensions, in a paper entitled “Quaternions as numbers of four-dimensional space,” published in the Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society [4 (1887), 54-7].
It is obvious from Maxwell’s own writings that, even before Hathaway’s formalization, his choice of quaternions as mathematical operators for his electromagnetic theory was based on his belief that three-dimensional physical phenomena (including even perhaps the basis of human consciousness itself) are dependent upon higher dimensional realities. For, in honor of another great mathematician of the time, multi-dimensional geometer Arthur Cayley, Maxwell wrote …
“Oh WRETCHED race of men, to space confined!
What honour can ye pay to him, whose mind
To that which lies beyond hath penetrated?
The symbols he hath formed shall sound his praise,
And lead him on through unimagined ways
To conquests new, in worlds not yet created.
First, ye Determinants! In ordered row
And massive column ranged, before him go,
To form a phalanx for his safe protection.
Ye powers of the nth roots of – 1!
Around his head in ceaseless* cycles run,
As unembodied spirits of direction.
And you, ye undevelopable scrolls!
Above the host wave your emblazoned rolls,
Ruled for the record of his bright inventions.
Ye cubic surfaces! By threes and nines
Draw round his camp your seven-and-twenty lines-
The seal of Solomon in three dimensions.
March on, symbolic host! With step sublime,
Up to the flaming bounds of Space and Time!
There pause, until by Dickenson depicted,
In two dimensions, we the form may trace
Of him whose soul, too large for vulgar space,
In n dimensions flourished unrestricted.”
— James Clerk Maxwell
To the Committee of the Cayley Portrait Fund — 1887
Confirmation that Maxwell’s “hyper-dimensional” inquiries extended far beyond “mere” physical interactions can be seen from another of his “unknown” poems …
“My soul is an entangled knot,
Upon a liquid vortex wrought
By Intellect in the Unseen residing.
And thine doth like a convict sit,
With marlinspike untwisting it,
Only to find its knottiness abiding;
Since all the tool for its untying
In four-dimensional space are lying.”
In another work (“The Aether,” 1876), Maxwell underscored the “ultimate” significance of these inquiries …
“Whether this vast homogeneous expanse of isotropic matter [the aether] is fitted not only to be a medium of physical Interaction between distant bodies, and to fulfill other physical functions of which, perhaps we have as yet no conception, but also as the authors of
The Unseen Universe seem to suggest, to constitute the material organism of beings excercising functions of life and mind as high or higher than ours are at resent, is a question far transcending the limits of physical speculation …”
This startling connection — between Maxwell’s demonstrably deep interest in questions “hyperdimensional,” including his direct homage to one of his scientific mentors’, Arthur Cayley’s hyperdimensional geometry (the “27 lines on the general cubic surface” problem — see diagram, right); and our rediscovery over a century later of that same geometry … at a place called “Cydonia” … on Mars — is nothing short of astonishing. But, if you doubt such a compelling connection, just reread those key lines–
“…Ye cubic surfaces! By threes and nines, Draw round his camp your seven-and-twenty lines- The seal of Solomon in three dimensions [emphasis added] ..”
Which, of course, are nothing less than the geometrical and mathematical underpinnings of the infamous “circumscribed tetrahedral latitude” memoralized all over Cydonia … 19.5 degrees, the identical, hyper-dimensional quaternion geometry whose physical effects (see below) we have now rediscovered all across the solar system … and beyond!
In a tragedy for science (if not for society in general) whose outlines we are only now beginning to appreciate, after Maxwell’s death, two other 19th Century “mathematical physicists” — Oliver Heaviside and William Gibbs — “streamlined” Maxwell’s original equations down to four simple (if woefully incomplete!) expressions. Because Heaviside openly felt the quaternions were “an abomination” — never fully understanding the linkage between the critical scalar and vector components in Maxwell’s use of them to describe the potentials of empty space (“apples and oranges,” he termed them) — he eliminated over 200 quaternions from Maxwell’s original theory in his attempted “simplification.”
[Oliver Heaviside, described by Scientific American (Sept. 1950) as “self-taught and … never connected with any university … had [however] a remarkable and inexplicable ability (which was possessed also by Newton and Laplace …) to arrive at mathematical results of considerable complexity without going through any conscious process of proof …” According to other observers, Heaviside actually felt that Maxwell’s use of quaternions and their description of the “potentials” of space was “… mystical, and should be murdered from the theory …” which — by drastically editing Maxwell’s original work after the latter’s untimely death (from cancer), excising the scalar component of the quaternions and eliminating the hyperspatial characteristics of the directional (vector) components — Oliver Heaviside effectively accomplished singlehanded.]
This means, of course, that the four surviving “classic” Maxwell’s Equations — which appear in every electrical and physics text the world over, as the underpinnings of all 20th Century electrical and electromagnetic engineering, from radio to radar, from television to computer science, if not inclusive of every “hard” science from physics to chemistry to astrophysics that deals with electromagnetic radiative processes — never appeared in any original Maxwell’ paper or treatise! They are, in fact–
“Heaviside’s equations!”
Lest anyone doubt this is the case, they merely have to read a highly revealing paper on the subject by another renowned British mathematical physicist of this century, Sir Edmund Whittaker, titled simply “Oliver Heaviside” (Bulletin of the Calcutta Mathematical Society, Vol. 20, 1928-29, p.202); or, another overview of Heaviside by Paul J. Nahin, “Oliver Heaviside: Sage in Solitude” (IEEE Press, New York, 1988, p.9, note 3.).
The end result was that physics lost its promising theoretical beginnings to becoming truly “hyperdimensional” physics … over a century ago … and all that that implies.
Georg Bernard Riemann mathematically initiated the 19th Century scientific community (if not the rest of Victorian society) into the “unsettling” idea of “hyperspace,” on June 10, 1854. In a seminal presentation made at the University of Gottinggen in Germany, Riemann put forth the first mathematical description of the possibility of “higher, unseen dimensions …” under the deceptively simple title: “On the Hypotheses Which Lie at the Foundation of Geometry.”
Riemann’s paper was a fundamental assault on the 2000-year old assumptions of “Euclidian Geometry” — the ordered, rectilinear laws of “ordinary” three dimensional reality. In its place, Riemann proposed a four-dimensional reality (of which our 3-D reality was merely a “subset”), in which the geometric rules were radically different, but also internally self-consistent. Even more radical: Riemann proposed that the basic laws of nature in 3-space, the three mysterious forces then known to physics — electrostatics, magnetism and gravity — were all fundamentally united in 4-space, and merely “looked different” because of the resulting “crumpled geometry” of our three-dimensional reality …
In terms of actual physics, Riemann was suggesting something clearly revolutionary: a major break with Newton’s “force creates action-at-a-distance” theories of the time, which had been proposed to explain the “magical” properties of magnetic and electrical attraction and repulsion, gravitationally-curved motions of planets … and falling apples, for over 200 years; in place of Newton, Riemann was proposing that such “apparent forces'” are a direct result of objects moving through 3-space “geometry” … distorted by the intruding geometry of “4-space!”
It is clear that Maxwell and other “giants” of 19th Century physics (Kelvin, for one), as well as an entire contemporary generation of 19th Century mathematicians (like Cayle, Tait, etc.) , took Riemann’s ideas very much to heart; Maxwell’s original selection of 4-space quaternions as the mathematical operators for his force equations and descriptions of electrical and magnetic interaction, clearly demonstrate his belief in Riemann’s approach; and, his surprising literary excursions into poetry — vividly extolling the implications of “higher-dimensional realities” … including musings on their relationship to the ultimate origin of the human soul (above) — emphatically confirm this outlook.
So, how can modern “hyperdimensional physicists” — like Michio Kaku, at City College of the City University of New York — representative of an entirely new generation of physical scientists now reexamining these century-old implications of “hyperspatial geometries” for generating the basic laws of Reality itself, almost casually claim:
“… In retrospect, Riemann’s famous lecture was popularized to a wide audience via mystics, philosophers and artists, but did little to further our understanding of nature … First, there was no attempt to use hyperspace to simplify the laws of nature. Without Riemann’s original guiding principle — that the laws of nature become simple in higher dimensions — scientists during this period were groping in the dark. Riemann’s seminal idea of using geometry — that is, crumpled hyperspace — to explain the essence of a a force’ was forgotten during those years … The mathematical apparatus developed by Riemann became a province of pure mathematics, contrary to Riemann’s original intentions. Without field theory, you cannot make any predictions with hyperspace [emphasis added]…”
— M. Kaku, “Hyperspace”
[ Doubleday (Anchor Books): New York, 1994]
Kaku’s statement belies the entire “modern” outlook on 19th Century physics, and leaves the distinct impression of an apparently unconscious “bias” similar to Heaviside’s, regarding Maxwell’s actual treatment of such matters; certainly, in completely ignoring Maxwell’s true discussion of the importance of the underlying four-dimensional “scalar potentials” for creating such “fields.” And remember: Heaviside also thought of such “potentials” as … “mystical …”
The use of little-known Hamiltonian 4-space quaternions, to represent the effect of “scalar potentials” on electric charges (as opposed to Heaviside’s vectorial descriptions of direct “electric force fields”) obviously have led to great confusion; because … Maxwell’s “scalar potentials” are, of course, nothing short of exactly what Riemann initially proposed–
Quantifiable “geometric spatial distortions” … the exact marriage of hyperspatial geometry and field theory that Kaku and others mistakenly believe (because they’re basing their analysis on Heaviside’s surviving vectorial version of Maxwell’s original “Equations”) is totally missing from this greatest achievement of 19th Century physics!
The major source of confusion surrounding Maxwell’s actual Theory, versus what Heaviside reduced it to, is its math — a notation system perhaps best described by H.J. Josephs (“The Heaviside Papers found at Paignton in 1957,” Electromagnetic Theory by Oliver Heaviside, Including an account of Heaviside’s unpublished notes for a fourth volume, and with a forward by Sir Edmund Whittaker, Vol. III, Third Edition, Chelsea Publishing Co., New York, 1971).
According to Josephs:
“Hamilton’s algebra of quaternions, unlike Heaviside’s algebra of vectors, is not a mere abbreviated mode of expressing Cartesian analysis, but is an independent branch of mathematics with its own rules of operation and its own special theorems. A quaternion is, in fact, a generalized or hypercomplex number … [emphasis added]”
And, you will remember, in 1897 Hathaway published a paper specifically identifying these hypercomplex numbers as “… numbers in four-dimensional space” (above). Thus, modern physics’ apparent ignorance of Maxwell’s 19th Century success — a mathematically-based, four-dimensional “field-theory” — would seem to originate from a basic lack of knowledge of the true nature of Hamilton’s quaternion algebra itself!
[Apparently, unless a “hyperdimensional theory” is narrowly expressed in terms of a separate technique Riemann himself invented for his own N-dimensional mapping — the so-called “metric tensor” — modern physicists don’t seem to be able to recognize it as a valid higher-dimensional model … not even when it was written in its own, specifically-designed, four-dimensional mathematical notation! (Riemann’s “metric tensor,” BTW, is essentially a graphical checkerboard composed, for a 4-space description, of 16 numbers defining, for instance, field strength at each point in that four-dimensional space. It is NOT written in quaternions.)
And, unless you track down an original 1873 copy of Maxwell’s “Treatise,” there is no easy way to verify the existence of Maxwell’s “hyperdimensional” quaternion notation; for, by 1892, the Third Edition incorporated a “correction” to Maxwell’s original use of “scalar potentials” (contributed by George Francis Fitzgerald — whom Heaviside heavily admired) — thus removing a crucial distinction between 4-space “geometric potential,” and a 3-space “vector field,” from all subsequent “Maxwellian theory.” Which is why Kaku apparently doesn’t realize that Maxwell’s original equations were, in fact, the first geometric 4-space field theory … expressed in specific 4-space terms … the language of quaternions!
Just another measure of Heaviside’s effectiveness …]
One of the difficulties of proposing a “higher dimension” is that, inevitably, people (and scientists are people!), will ask: “Ok, where is it? Where is the fourth dimension’ ..?”
One of the most persistent objections to the 4-space geometries of Riemann, Cayley, Tait … and Maxwell, was that no experimental proof of a “fourth dimension” was readily apparent; one of the more easily understandable aspects of “higher dimensionality” was that, a being from a “lower dimension” (a two-dimensional “Flatlander,” for instance) entering our “higher” three-dimensional reality, would appear to vanish instantly from the lower-dimensional world (and, consequently, appear just as suddenly in the higher dimension — but geometrically distorted.) When she returned to her own dimension, she would just as “magically” reappear …
Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your perspective …) to the scientific mind, people in our dimension don’t just “turn a corner one day … and promptly vanish into Riemann’s fourth dimension.'” While mathematically derivable and beautifully consistent, to “experimentalists” (and all real science ultimately has to be based on verifiable, independently repeatable experiments) there seemed no testable, physical proof of “hyperdimensional physics.”
Thus “hyperspace”– as a potential solution to unifying the major laws of physics — after Maxwell’s death, and the major rewriting of his Theory, quietly disappeared … not to resurface for almost half a century …
Until April of 1919.
At that time, a remarkable letter was delivered to one “Albert Einstein.” Written by an obscure mathematician at the University of Konigsberg in Germany, Theodr Kaluza, the letter’s first few lines offered a startling solution (at least, to Einstein — unknowing of Maxwell’s original quaternion equations) to one of physics’ still most intractable problems: the mathematical unification of his own theory of gravity with Maxwell’s theory of electromagnetic radiation … via introduction of a fifth dimension. (Because Einstein, in formulating the General and Special Theory of Relativity in the intervening years since Riemann, had already appropriated time as the “fourth dimension,” Kaluza was forced to specify his additional spatial dimension as “the fifth.” In fact, this was the same spatial dimension as the 4-space designations used by Maxwell and his colleagues in their models … over 50 years before.)
Despite its stunning (Einstein mulled over the paper’s implications for more than two years, before finally supporting its scientific publication) mathematical success, in apparently — finally — uniting “gravity” and “light,” the same question, “OK, where is it?” was asked of Kaluza as had been asked of Riemann, over 60 years before; because, there was no overt experimental proof (for instance, people and things up and “disappearing”) of the physical existence of another spatial dimension. To which Kaluza this time had a very clever answer: he proposed that this “fourth dimension” — unlike the other three we are familiar with — somehow had collapsed down to a tiny circle … “smaller than the smallest atom …”
In 1926, another essentially unknown mathematician, Oskar Klein, was investigating the peculiar implications of Kaluza’s ideas in the context of the newly-invented atomic theory of “quantum mechanics.” [Klein was a specialist in the truly arcane field of mathematical topology — the higher dimensional surfaces of objects; the twisted 3-D topology of the 2-D surface of a “Klein Bottle” is named specifically in his honor]. Quantum mechanics had just been proposed a year or so before Klein’s further topological investigation of Kaluza’s ideas, by Max Planck and many others rebelling against perceived limitations of Maxwell’s (remember, heavily sanitized by Gibbs and Heaviside) classical Electromagnetic Theory. The “quantum mechanics ” theory would eventually become a highly successful (if bizarre, by common-sense standards) non-geometric effort to describe interactions between “fundamental particles,” exchanging “forces” through discrete “quantitized” particles and energy in the sub-atomic world. Eventually, combining the two inquiries, Klein theorized that, if it truly existed, Kaluza’s new dimension likely had somehow collapsed down to the “Planck length” itself — supposedly the smallest possible size allowed by these fundamental interactions. However, that size was only about … 10-33 cm long!
Thus, the main obstacle to experimental verification of the Kaluza-Klein Theory (and the reason why people simply didn’t “walk into the fourth dimension”), was that quantum mechanics calculations affirmed that the only way to physically probe such an infinitesimally tiny dimension was with a new machine … an “atom smasher.” There was only one small “technical” problem …
The energy required would exceed the output of all the power plants on Earth … and then some!
Thus, the brief “blip” of new interest in “hyperdimensional physics” — the discussions of Kaluza-Klein among physicists and topologists — “dropped through the floor” by the 1930’s. This occurred both because of Klein’s “proof” of the apparent impossibility of any direct experimental verification of additional dimensions … and because of the dramatic revolution then sweeping the increasingly technological world of Big Science–
The flood of “verifications”gushing forth from atom smashers all around the world, feverishly engaged in probing the new area the experimentalists apparently could verify: the multiplying populations of “fundamental particles”spawned by the bizarre mathematical world (even more bizarre than “N-dimensions”) of Quantum Mechanics.
30 more years would pass … before (almost by mathematical “accident”) in 1968, the current mainstream “flap” of renewed scientific interest in “hyperspace” would be, like the legendary Phoenix, “magically” reborn — a theory now known as “Superstrings” … in which fundamental particles, and “fields,” are viewed as hyperspace vibrations of infinitesimal, multi-dimensional strings … From those relatively inauspicious beginnings, stretching across more than 60 years, the current focus of scientific research papers on “hyperspace” — from continued research into updated versions of the old “Kaluza-Klein Theory”; to discussions of the much newer “Supergravity” hyperspace unification model; to the exotic “String Theory” itself — has grown geometrically (over 5000 papers by 1994 alone, according to Michio Kaku — see above). This much attention to a subject involving realities you can’t even see, represents nothing short of a fundamental psychological revolution sweeping across a major segment of the worldwide scientific community.
For most physicists currently interested in the problem, the “Superstring” hyper-dimensional model has overwhelming advantages over all its predecessors. Besides effectively unifying all the known forces of the Universe … from electromagnetism to the nuclear force … in a literally beautiful “ultimate”picture of Reality, it also makes a specific prediction about the total number of N-dimensions that can form:
“Ten” (or “26,” depending on the rotation of the “strings”).
The bad news is: they can’t be tested either …
As all ten dimensions are curled up (in the model) inside the same experimentally unreachable “Planck length” which spelled the scientific demise of the original Kaluza-Klein …
Impasse.
This, then is the current situation.
The “hottest” mainstream scientific theory to come along in more than half a century, the next best thing to a “Theory of Everything” (and seriously attempting to become precisely that …), is not only a Hyperdimensional Model of Reality … it is another one which, by its fundamental nature–
Can’t scientifically be tested!
While a “hyperdimensional model” which can be tested easily — as this paper will unequivocally show — for over a 100 years has been systematically ignored.
Is it just us … or is there something truly wrong with this picture?
Lt. Col Thomas E. Bearden, retired army officer and physicist, has been perhaps the most vocal recent proponent for restoring integrity to the scientific and historical record regarding James Clerk Maxwell — by widely promulgating his original equations; in a series of meticulously documented papers on the subject, going back at least 20 years, Bearden has carried on a relentless one-man research effort regarding what Maxwell really claimed. His painstaking, literally thousands of man-hours of original source documentation has led directly to the following, startling conclusion:
Maxwell’s original theory is, in fact, the true, so-called “Holy Grail” of physics … the first successful unified field theory in the history of Science … a fact apparently completely unknown to the current proponents of “Kaluza-Klein,” “Supergravity,” and “Superstring” ideas ….
Just how successful, Bearden documents below:
” … In discarding the scalar component of the quaternion, Heaviside and Gibbs unwittingly discarded the unified EM/G [electromagnetic/ gravitational] portion of Maxwell’s theory that arises when the translation/directional components of two interacting quaternions reduce to zero, but the scalar resultant remains and infolds a deterministic, dynamic structure that is a function of oppositive directional/translational components. In the infolding of EM energy inside a scalar potential, a structured scalar potential results, almost precisely as later shown by Whittaker but unnoticed by the scientific community. The simple vector equations produced by Heaviside and Gibbs captured only that subset of Maxwell’s theory where EM and gravitation are mutually exclusive. In that subset, electromagnetic circuits and equipment will not ever, and cannot ever, produce gravitational or inertial effects in materials and equipment.
“Brutally, not a single one of those Heaviside/ Gibbs equations ever appeared in a paper or book by James Clerk Maxwell, even though the severely restricted Heaviside/Gibbs interpretation is universally and erroneously taught in all Western universities as Maxwell’s theory.
“As a result of this artificial restriction of Maxwell’s theory, Einstein also inadvertently restricted his theory of general relativity, forever preventing the unification of electromagnetics and relativity. He also essentially prevented the present restricted general relativity from ever becoming an experimental, engineerable science on the laboratory bench, since a hidden internalized electromagnetics causing a deterministically structured local spacetime curvature was excluded.
“Quantum mechanics used only the Heaviside/ Gibbs externalized electromagnetics and completely missed Maxwell’s internalized and ordered electromagnetics enfolded inside a structured scalar potential. Accordingly, QM [quantum mechanics] maintained its Gibbs statistics of quantum change, which is nonchaotic a priori. Quantum physicists by and large excluded Bohm’s hidden variable theory, which conceivably could have offered the potential of engineering quantum change — engineering physical reality itself.
“Each of these major scientific disciplines missed and excluded a subset of their disciplinary area, because they did not have the scalar component of the quaternion to incorporate. Further, they completely missed the significance of the Whittaker approach, which already shows how to apply and engineer the very subsets they had excluded.
“What now exists in these areas are three separate, inconsistent disciplines. Each of them unwittingly excluded a vital part of its discipline, which was the unified field part. Ironically, then, present physicists continue to exert great effort to find the missing key to unification of the three disciplines, but find it hopeless, because these special subsets are already contradictory to one another, as is quite well-known to foundations physicists.
“Obviously, if one wishes to unify physics, one must add back the unintentionally excluded, unifying subsets to each discipline. Interestingly, all three needed subsets turn out to be one and the same …”
— T.E. Bearden, “Possible Whittaker Unification of
Electromagnetics, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics,”
(Association of Distinguished American Scientists
2311 Big Cove Road, Huntsville, Alabama, 35801)
Given Bearden’s analysis — what did we actually lose … when science “inadvertently lost Maxwell ..?”
If two key physics papers often cited by Bearden (which appeared decades after the death of Maxwell), are accurate … we lost nothing less than–
The “electrogravitic” control of gravity itself!!
The critically-important research cited by Bearden was originally published by “Sir Edmund Whittaker” (the same cited earlier in this paper), beginning in 1903. The first was titled “On the partial differential equations of mathematical physics” (Mathematische Annalen, Vol. 57, 1903, p.333-335); the second, “On an Expression of the Electromagnetic Field due to Electrons by means of two Scalar Potential Functions” (Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, Vol.1, 1904, p. 367-372).
Whittaker, a leading world-class physicist himself, single-handedly rediscovered the “missing” scalar components of Maxwell’s original quaternions, extending their (at the time) unseen implications for finally uniting “gravity” with the more obvious electrical and magnetic components known as “light.” In the first paper, as Bearden described, Whittaker theoretically explored the existence of a “hidden” set of electromagnetic waves traveling in two simultaneous directions in the scalar potential of the vacuum — demonstrating how to use them to curve the local and/or distant “spacetime” with electromagnetic radiation, in a manner directly analogous to Einstein’s later “mass-curves-space” equations. This key Whittaker paper thus lays the direct mathematical foundation for an electrogravitic theory/technology of gravity control. In the second paper, Whittaker demonstrated how two “Maxwellian scalar potentials of the vacuum” — gravitationally curving spacetime — could be turned back into a detectable “ordinary” electromagnetic field by two interfering “scalar EM waves”… even at a distance.
Whittaker accomplished this by demonstrating mathematically that “the field of force due to a gravitating body can be analyzed, by a spectrum analysis’ as it were, into an infinite number of constituent fields; and although the whole field of force does not vary with time, yet each of the constituent fields is an undulatory character, consisting of a simple-disturbance propagated with uniform velocity … [and] the waves will be longitudinal (top) … These results assimilate the propagation of gravity to that of light … [and] would require that gravity be propagated with a finite velocity, which however need not be the same as that of light [emphasis added], and may be enormously greater …” (Op. Cit., “On the partial differential equations of mathematical physics“)
Remarkably, four years before Whittaker’s theoretical analysis of these potentials (pun intended …), on the evening of July 3-4, 1899, Nikola Tesla (right) — the literal inventor of modern civilization (via the now worldwide technology of “alternating current”) — experimentally anticipated “Whittaker’s interfering scalar waves” by finding them in nature; from massive experimental radio transmitters he had built on a mountain top in Colorado, he was broadcasting and receiving (by his own assertion) “longitudinal stresses” (as opposed to conventional EM “transverse waves”) through the vacuum. This he was accomplishing with his own, hand-engineered equipment (produced according to Maxwell’s original, quaternion equations), when he detected an interference “return” from a passing line of thunderstorms. Tesla termed the phenomenon a “standing columnar wave,” and tracked it electromagnetically for hours as the cold front moved across the West (Nikola Tesla, Colorado Springs Notes 1899-1900, Nolit, Beograd, Yugoslavia, 1978 pp. 61-62).
[Many have since speculated that Tesla’s many other astonishing (to the period) technological accomplishments, many of which apparently “were lost” with his death in 1942, were based on this true understanding of Maxwell’s original, “hyperdimensional” electromagnetic ideas …]
Tesla’s experimental earlier detection notwithstanding, what Whittaker theoretically demonstrated years after Tesla was that future electrical engineers could also take Maxwell’s original 4-space, quaternion description of electromagnetic waves (the real “Maxwell’s Equations”), add his own (Whittaker’s) specific gravitational potential analysis (stemming from simply returning Maxwell’s scalar quaternions in Heaviside’s version of “Maxwell’s Equations”…), and produce a workable “unified field theory” (if not technology!) of gravity control …
Unless by now, in some government “black project,” they already have—
And what we’ve deliberately been “leaked” over the last seven years, in repeated video images of “exotic vehicles” performing impossible, non-Newtonian maneuvers on official NASA TV shuttle coverage … is simply the result!
Theory is one thing (Maxwell’s or Whittaker’s), but experimental results are supposedly the ultimate Arbiter of Scientific Truth. Which makes it all the more curious that Tesla’s four-year observational anticipation of Whittaker’s startling analysis of Maxwell — the experimental confirmation of an electromagnetic “standing columnar (longitudinal) wave” in thunderstorms — has been resolutely ignored by both physicists and electrical engineers for the past 100 years; as have the stunning NASA TV confirmations of “something” (above) maneuvering freely in Earth orbit.
With that as prologue, a new generation of physicists, also educated in the grand assumption that “Heaviside’s Equations” are actually “Maxwell’s,” were abruptly brought up short in 1959 with another remarkable, equally elegant experiment — which finally demonstrated in the laboratory the stark reality of Maxwell’s “pesky scalar potentials” … those same “mystical” potentials that Heaviside so effectively banished for all time from current (university-taught) EM theory.
In that year two physicists, Yakir Aharonov and David Bohm, conducted a seminal “electrodynamics” laboratory experiment (“Significance of Electromagnetic Potentials in Quantum Theory,” The Physical Review, Vol. 115, No. 3, pp. 485-491; August, 1959). Aharonov and Bohm, almost 100 years after Maxwell first predicted their existence, succeeded in actually measuring the “hidden potential” of free space, lurking in Maxwell’s original scalar quaternion equations. To do so, they had to cool the experiment to a mere 9 degrees above Absolute Zero, thus creating a total shielding around a superconducting magnetic ring [for a slightly different version of this same experiment — see diagram; the oscillation of electrical resistance in the ring (bottom graph) is due to the changing electron “wave functions” — triggered by the “hidden Maxwell scalar potential” created by the shielded magnet — see text, below].
Once having successfully accomplished this non-trivial laboratory set up, they promptly observed an “impossible” phenomenon:
Totally screened, by all measurements, from the magnetic influence of the ring itself, a test beam of electrons fired by Aharonov and Bohm at the superconducting “donut,” nonetheless, changed their electronic state (“wave functions”) as they passed through the observably “field-free” region of the hole — indicating they were sensing “something,” even though it could NOT be the ring’s magnetic field. Confirmed now by decades of other physicists’ experiments as a true phenomenon (and not merely improper shielding of the magnet), this “Aharonov-Bohm Effect” provides compelling proof of a deeper “spatial strain” — a “scalar potential” — underlying the existence of a so-called magnetic “force-field” itself. (Later experiments revealed a similar effect with shielded electrostatic fields …)
All of which provides compelling proof of “something else,” underlying all reality, capable of transmitting energy and information across space and time … even in the complete absence of an electromagnetically detectable 3-D spatial “field”–
Maxwell’s quaternion … hyperdimensional “potential.”
So, what does all this have to do with NASA’s announcement of a “new planet?”
If a “potential” without a field can exist in space — as Maxwell’s quaternion analysis first asserted, and Aharonov-Bohm “only” a century later ultimately found — then, as defined by Maxwell in his comparisons of the aether with certain properties of laboratory “solids,” such a potential is equivalent to an unseen, vorticular (rotating) “stress” in space. Or, in Maxwell’s own words (first written in 1873 …):
“There are physical quantities of another kind [in the aether] which are related to directions in space, but which are not vectors. Stresses and strains in solid bodies are examples, and so are some of the properties of bodies considered in the theory of elasticity and in the theory of double [rotated] refraction. Quantities of this class require for their definition nine [part of the “27-line”…] numerical specifications. They are expressed in the language of quaternions by linear and vector functions of a vector …”
— J.C. Maxwell, “A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism,”
(Vol.1, 3rd Edition, New York, 1954)
And stresses, when they are relieved, must release energy into their surroundings …
There is now much fevered discussion among physicists, (~100 years post-Maxwell) of the Quantum Electrodynamics Zero Point Energy (ZPE) of space — or, “the energy of the vacuum”; to many familiar with the original works of Maxwell, Kelvin, et. al., this sounds an awful lot like the once-familiar “aether” … merely updated and now passing under “an assumed name.” Thus, creating — then relieving — a “stress” in Maxwell’s vorticular aether is precisely equivalent to tapping the “energy of the vacuum” — which, according to current “quantum mechanics’ models,” possesses a staggering amount of such energy per cubic inch of space. Even inefficiently releasing a tiny percentage of this “strain energy” into our three dimensions — or, into a body existing in three-dimensional space — could make it appear as if the energy was coming from nowhere … “something from nothing.” In other words, to an entire generation of students and astrophysicists woefully ignorant of Maxwell’s real equations, such energy would appear as–
“Perpetual motion!”
Given the prodigious amount of “vacuum energy” calculated by modern physicists (trillions of atomic bomb equivalents per cubic centimeter …), even a relatively minor but sudden release of such vast vacuum (aether) stress potential inside a planet … could literally destroy it–
Finally answering the crucial astrophysical objection to the “exploded planet model” that Van Flandern has been encountering …
“But Tom — just how do you blow up’ an entire world?!”
The answer is now obvious: via hyperdimensional “vacuum stress energy” … ala Whittaker and Maxwell.
As we shall show, it is this “new” source of energy — in a far more “controlled” context — that seems also to be responsible now for not only the “anomalous infrared excesses” observed in the so-called “giant outer planets” of this solar system–
It is this same source of energy (in the Hyperdimensional Physics Model) that, according to our analysis, must now be primarily responsible for the radiated energies of stars … including the Sun itself.
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.
Which returns us to the Sun.
There is a very well-known, long-period, and still mysterious variability associated with the largest “hyperdimensional gate” in our own neighborhood — our “local” star, the Sun.
Its complex changes, which include a host of related surface phenomena — solar flares, coronal disturbances, mass ejections, etc. — is termed “the sunspot cycle” … because the number of simultaneous “spots” (lower-temperature vortices appearing “dark” against the hotter solar surface, as this activity occurs — left) waxes and wanes over about 11 years. (The full magnetic reversal of the Sun’s polarity takes two complete sunspot cycles to return to “zero” — thus the complete “solar cycle” is about 20 years.)
In the 1940’s, the Radio Corporation of America (RCA) hired a young electrical engineer — John Nelson — in an effort to improve the reliability of HF (“short-wave”) radio communications around Earth. Such radio transmissions had been observed to be, for some reason, more reliable in the “lulls” in between, than during solar activity associated with “peak” sunspot years.
To his surprise, Nelson soon specifically correlated this rising and falling radio interference with not only sunspot cycle, but with the motions of the major planets of the solar system; he found, to his increasing astonishment, a very repeatable — in essence, astrological correlation … between the inexorable orbits of all the planets (but especially, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune — which, remember, hold essentially all the solar’s system’s known angular momentum) … and major radio-disturbing eruptions on the Sun!
The Hyperdimensional Model finally provides a comprehensive theoretical explanation — a “linking mechanism” — for these, to a lot of astronomers, still embarrassing decades-old RCA observations. For, in essence what John Nelson had rediscovered was nothing short of a “Hyperdimensional Astrology” — the ultimate, very ancient, now highly demonstrable angular momentum foundations behind the real influences of the Sun and planets on our lives …
For, as part of his solar research, Nelson also “rediscovered” something else …
“It is worthy of note that in 1948 when Jupiter and Saturn were spaced by 120 degrees, and solar activity was at a maximum, radio signals averaged of far higher quality for the year than in 1951 with Jupiter and Saturn at 180 degrees and a considerable decline in solar activity. In other words, the average quality curve of radio signals followed the cycle curve between Jupiter and Saturn rather than the sunspot curve … [emphasis added].”
— J.H. Nelson, “Planetary Position Effect on
Short-Wave Signal Quality”
(Electrical Engineering, May 1952)
These decades-old observations are very telling … not only confirming Jupiter and Saturn as the primary “drivers” behind the Sun’s known cycle of activity (in the HD Model), but strongly implying an additional direct effect of their changing angular relationship on the electrical properties of Earth’s ionosphere. This, of course, is totally consistent with these changing planetary geometries affecting not just the Sun, but the other planets as well … just as “conventional” astrologers have claimed — via Maxwell’s “changing scalar potentials”…
Therefore, at this point, only the hyperdimensional theory–
1) Points to the (literally!) deepest implications of the simple astronomical fact that the “tail wags the dog”– that the planets in this physics are fully capable of exerting a determinant influence on the Sun — and each other — through their disproportionate ratio of total solar system angular momentum … over 100 to 1, in the [known!] planets’ favor.
Only the Hyperdimensional Model–
2) Possesses the precise physical mechanism — via Maxwell’s “changing quaternion scalar potentials” — accounting for this “anomalous” planetary angular momentum influence.
And, only the HD theory–
3) Has already publicly identified, at the United Nations, in 1992, a blatant geometric clue to this entire HD solar process: the maximum sunspot numbers (those large, relatively “cool,” rotating vortices appearing on the solar surface), rising and falling and methodically changing latitude, during the course of the familiar 22-year solar cycle–
And peaking every half-cycle (~11 years), at the hyperdimensionally-significant solar latitude of ~ “19.5 degrees!”
Furthermore, recent discoveries via the indirect technique of “helioseismology” (optical monitoring of sound waves vibrating back and forth within the Sun), have revealed another clear solar “hyper-dimensional signature at play; a curious “jet,” flowing around the north pole several thousand miles below the visible solar surface; the remarkable similarity to an equivalent phenomenon discovered by Voyager flowing around the north pole of Saturn — a “polar hexagon” in the clouds — even to the latitude, seems just a bit “too coincidental.”
Unfortunately, because the discovery is not based on direct imaging (as with Voyager), but on an indirect “sub-surface flow” technique, the investigators have rounded off the corners of the potential sub-surface “solar hexagon“; in fact, they should consult more frequently with their NASA planetary colleagues for additional examples of this geometric, now clearly hyperdimensional “flow pattern” elsewhere in the solar system …
The increasing identification of the hyperdimensional mechanism underlying the Sun’s primary energy production has, unfortunately, brought with it certain inevitable, potentially disquieting predictions …
Described first by Kepler as his “Third Law,” the farther out a planet orbits from its star the longer is its period of revolution. Since we’re talking about possible additional planets driving this entire Hyperdimensional Solar Process (see again angular momentum diagram, above) — planets that must be hundreds of times farther from the Sun than Earth (Pluto is “only” 40 times its distance, and orbits in “only” about 250 years) — the “years” of these extremely distant worlds could equal thousands if not tens of thousands of Earth’s year … depending on their orbits. Because of these immense orbital periods, the cycles of solar energy production driven by their combined angular momentum will also be v-e-r-y long, indeed–
Perhaps as long as ~26,000 years … (remember that number).
Also remember that such distant planets — even if not particularly massive — will have a disproportionately large effect on the total solar HD energy generation, because of the enormous “leverage” in the angular momentum equation with increasing distance. Thus, these still undiscovered worlds must in fact account for most of the solar energy we see … depending on the actual orbital periods; the repeated ultra-long-term phasings of their orbits — creating equally long-term angular momentum resonances in the Sun — must produce resulting long-term cyclic changes in the Sun’s total luminosity … lasting literally thousands of years … far longer than the short-term, historical “sunspot cycle” Nelson first linked directly to the known members of the solar system.
There is already a well-known link, between the historical 11-year “sunspot cycle” — increased solar flares, x-ray emission, frequency of “coronal mass ejections,” etc. — and a measurable (if inexplicable as yet) increase in total solar energy production. Misnamed “the solar constant,” this cyclic increase and decrease (according to satellite measurements) is curiously in phase with the current sunspot cycle … averaging about 0.15%.
This NASA-documented short-term variation of the entire Sun, is now directly traceable (in the HD Model) to the changing geometric phase relationships between the solar system’s two largest known planets, Jupiter and Saturn (as Nelson long ago confirmed); their orbital conjunctions — when both worlds return again to the same geometric position, relative to one another — take place on average roughly every 20 years … the mean of the full “magnetic” solar cycle! (At the “half cycle” — the familiar 11-year sunspot period itself — Jupiter and Saturn are, of course, 180 degrees out of phase … a critical clue to the determinate, modulating hyperspatial geometry actually inherent in this process …)
But, if the known changes in solar output are due to hyperdimensional effects of the largest known planets, what of the magnitude of “aether stress” produced by our proposed “new planets” — with angular momentum contributions hundreds of times greater?; the long-term cyclic increase in solar energy created by those cyclic phasings (yet-to-be-experienced in recorded history …) could measure as much as several percent above current solar output. This is more than enough additional energy — even without Mankind’s current addition of significant “greenhouse gasses” to the atmosphere — to trigger profound, millennia-long climatic changes here on Earth–
Including … melting ice caps; rising ocean levels; dramatic changes in jet stream altitudes and activity; increased tornado intensities; increased hurricane wind velocities … and–
A permanent “El Nino” (whose warmest waters, satellites report, are at … ~19.5 degrees).
And that’s saying nothing about HD energy added to the internal workings of our planet …
From all indications, we are now well into just such a new, long-term, cyclic solar period … just as the HD Model has predicted. The implications should be obvious.
Enter once more, Susan Terebey.
With the discovery and official NASA announcement of Dr. Terebey’s “new planet” — a “Jovian-type” world 450 light years away … yet, in apparent total isolation — we have the perfect conditions for a new series of crucial tests of the “Hyperdimensional Model,” starting with–
1) Systematic spectroscopic observations (carried out over days or months), to detect the presence of any satellites of this proposed Jovian-type world. Curiously, this possibility has not even been alluded to in any of the official NASA presentations on this object (see NASA artist’s depiction).
It is almost inconceivable that such a giant world could have formed without multiple orbiting satellites; just look at the “miniature solar systems” of moons orbiting the major planets of this solar system …
Confirmation of such additional objects would in itself be another major scientific “first.” But, in this case, it would also have far deeper implications; some of those same moons could have considerable mass themselves — perhaps as much as Mars … or even Earth … depending on the parent planet’s mass. The latter could, in fact, be independently determined (via appropriate application of “Kepler’s Laws”) through physical detection of such moons and determining their orbital periods. This would then provide a completely independent calibration of the accuracy of the “primary object’s” currently estimated mass — derived, as Terebey’s freely admits, solely from theoretical “cooling curves” (see above) and the “new planet’s” measured IR luminosity itself.
These additional remarkable objects (if they exist …) should be detectable with a variety of present astronomical technologies — including Hubble — provided someone looks.
[And, confirmation of truly massive satellites (a “Mars” or “Earth”) circling this new “potential planet” could vindicate, in a stroke, a major piece of Van Flandern’s own revolutionary model — that our own Mars (if not a number of other objects) once orbited a larger planet in this solar system as satellites … until all (including Mars) were released by the catastrophic explosion of that “parent world.”
Van Flandern, one of the world’s leading celestial mechanics experts, has calculated the probable orbital parameters of such an extraordinary event — and has reached the conclusion that Mars’ uniquely elliptical path around the Sun (of all the inner planets) is highly consistent with its “escape” from such a “missing,” former member of the solar system …]
Successful detection of a “Mars” or “Earth” (or any significant satellites) orbiting Susan Terebey’s “new planet” would immediate present possibilities for carrying out the same variety of HD tests proposed (above) for the outer planets of this solar system, starting with–
2) Detection of distinct variations in the “new planet’s” own infrared emissions — synchronized with the calculated orbital periods of any detected satellites (or resonances thereof …). This would offer immediate, compelling evidence for the general correctness of the “Hyperdimensional Model” … especially, if such IR signatures could be matched with similar types of time-varying emissions observed radiating from the giant planets of this solar system …
Such confirmations would provide crucial and timely evidence supporting the basic correctness of the “HD Model.” Equally important, if such confirmations are forthcoming, the extraordinary possibility will be further enhanced that this same fundamental physics, in our own solar system, could … and has–
Destroyed entire worlds …
For those who need a “practical” reason to address these issues, consider this:
Understanding the conditions under which these types of “epochal events” could come to pass … and if, through proper understanding and control of “HD Physics,” they can be averted for our planet … would seem a simple, basic rationale for renewed interest in what Maxwell really stated. Given the demonstrable, historically-unprecedented changes currently occurring in our own environment — from mysteriously-rising geophysical and volcanic activity (some of the most significant now occurring at that suspicious “19.5 degrees!”), to increasingly anomalous climatological and meteorological activity (does anyone notice that hurricanes have always been born at an average latitude of …19.5 degrees?) — verifying the effects of a changing “hyperdimensional physics” in our own neighborhood is far from being “merely academic.”
Then, of course, there are the continuing, dramatic changes in the Sun…
Immediate solar predictions of the HD Model are simple and quite clear: increasingly violent average solar surface activity — modulated with the rising and falling with the familiar “sunspot cycle” of ~11 years (cycle #23 should be a “lulu!”) — taking place against a backdrop of equally dramatic, long-term rising of total solar energy emission.
The major unknown is the overall effect of this slowly increasing “HD energy” availability throughout the entire solar system; for, remember, the changing “aether stress” is not localized inside stars or planets; these concentrations of “matter” merely allow us to trace the visible effects — like red dye in clear water — of these underlying, changing “hyperspatial strains.” Thus, the overall dynamical effect of the Earth’s own significant (to us!) angular momentum interaction with this changing solar system physics — including its own long-term, “higher order rotation,” the ~26,000 year precessional cycle and the mysterious role of the Moon — is all still quite uncertain …
However, recent anomalous observations of perhaps the most fundamental dynamical parameter of Earth — its own rotation — seem to support this growing perception that “something” indeed is rapidly changing in the solar system …
For some inexplicable reason, there has been an accelerating slow-down of the Earth’s spin on its own axis over the last twenty years — as measured against electronic transitions of the “Cesium Atomic Clock,” maintained at the National Bureau of Standards, in Boulder, Colorado.
Theoretically stable to “plus or minus one second in a million years …” the official atomic clocks have literally had to be adjusted by over 20 seconds in these preceding two decades — a stunning change by astronomical standards, and striking confirmation of some kind of major, “progressive phase-shift” now occurring, between the rotation of our planet and the atomic-level “constants” that govern the quantum standards of the Clock. This need to, with increasing frequency (now, approximately every six months) update a full second differential between “dynamical time” and “time at the atomic level,” is profound confirmation of some kind of fundamental coupling between the angular momentum of our own planet, and the larger changes occurring in the hyperspatial physics of the solar system … as outlined in the basic HD Model. This includes the possibility that these changing “hyperspatial stresses,” due to the progressive orbital movement of our as-yet-undiscovered “outer planets” (in the Model) are simply causing increasing “Maxwellian scalar potential changes” all across the solar system at the atomic level — changing (via the “Aharonov-Bohm Effect”) all resultant quantum-level “constants” governing the clocks by small (but laboratory-measurable) amounts.
If this is true, it could thus be the Clocks themselves that are also internally changing … simultaneous with the predicted, accelerating slow-down in the basic rotation of the Earth!
Additional evidence that “something major” is occurring in the solar system, is the recent announcement (by three major “world-class” laboratories) of startling changes in another fundamental physical parameter — the Gravitational Constant; according to an article published in “Science News” in 1995, not only has this centuries-old “constant” been found to differ now from all previous “textbook” values … each of the three laboratories reported different changes … the largest amounting to a whopping (by measurement standards) 0.06%!
Completely inexplicable by any mainstream theories, such changes are intrinsically expected (ala Whittaker’s derivation of “electrogravitic” linkages between gravity and light) in the true Maxwellian analysis of “varying scalar potentials” of the vacuum. Again: changes modulated by the changing phase relationships between our proposed “undiscovered outer planets” in the “total solar system angular momentum equation.”
There is insufficient room to develop here (let alone to document) all the additional implications stemming from this Model (that will be done elsewhere). Suffice it to say, this is intrinsically a changing physics, affecting every known system of astronomical, physical, chemical and biological interaction differently over time — because it affects the underlying, dynamical hyperspace foundation of “physical reality” itself … starting with this solar system; that is implicit in the Model.
And now, according to all accumulating evidence and this centuries-old physics … we are simply entering once again (after “only” 13,000 years …) a phase of this recurring, grand solar system cycle “of renewed hyperdimensional restructuring of that reality …“
It is for these basic reasons that NASA must now openly — and rapidly — carry out these recommended new observations of the solar system, including additional, detailed measurements of “TMR-1C” … and then immediately tell us the results.
Time is getting short.
Dededexter's Blog 
