Sakharov's Induced Gravity, 1966

Having spent thirty plus years contemplating gravitational induction, it was perhaps only a matter of time before I was to come across Sakharov's "Induced Gravity", which he wrote in 1966.
I doff my cap to his realization that gravity may have a means of being induced.
Reading his paper makes me feel a little like a bull in a china shop, in that it is only with great difficulty that I can grasp the abstract, let alone the equations. This is not Sakharov's shortcoming, but mine.

The clear delineation between Sakharov's approach to the subject of gravitational induction and my own contemplations, is that Sakharov presents the issue in pure theory, whereas my work is at the material end, offering a means by which gravitational induction can be brought about physically, through high energy plasma configurations, a means to directly observe the phenomenon.
Sakharov paper mentions Vacuum Quantum Fluctuations once in the footnotes, but no applicable imposition exists throughout the actual paper, whereas Absolute Vacuums are the cornerstone of my work. Sakharov sees a vacuum in the conventional sense as 'a space with nothing in it', whereas my definition of a vacuum is 'a volume with no space in it'. The difference is significant.
Sakharov never mentions high energy plasmas in his paper, the means with which I believe Absolute Vacuums may come about.

Furthermore, in my thesis of gravitational induction it is not necessary to delve any deeper than the atomic level, rather than the more complex behavior of subatomic matter. Although higher atomic elements surely play a part which I am hitherto unable to discern, most of my reasoning is based

on the fact that the Sun - and the Universe - is for the most part hydrogen; one proton, one electron. The Absolute Vacuum, or non-space part of my hypothesis suggests that the plasmas capacity to create magnetic repulsion of like particles is capable of 'sweeping' space away, creating the conditions for non-space.
Finally, perhaps because of my less eloquent and more pedantic approach to what after all is a fantastic notion that requires extraordinary proofs, I offer a prediction of an as-yet unobserved natural phenomenon on the nature of solar neutrinos and a repeatable laboratory experiment.
Sakharov who is a respected theorist and physicist, expresses his ideas in mathematical formulae, whereas my background can be traced to the mud of visual natural history, in the case of gravitational induction I am inspired by Hans Christian Ørsted. Both approaches are an attempt to tease out secrets from the natural world; I believe mine to be a little more of a 'show me' nature.

Ultimately, I suppose the difference of our approach to gravitational induction is that his concept may be proved or disproved by strokes on a blackboard, whereas my conjectures will stand or fall by observational evidence.

I am glad to find there are others - and in this case a great scientist - who holds the belief that gravity can be induced without a corresponding quantity of mass.

Absolute Vacuums or Non-Space made easy...

I can't count the times I have winced when someone has exclaimed, "Oh! So you're telling me the Sun is hollow?"
For this reason, I have created this little vignette. It is a simple thought model that offers a rudimentary outline of Absolute Vacuums, or Non-Space. The explanation does not go so far as to explain how these are maintained against the implosion of space. For that, you can read
"Can Gravity be Induced?" which I wrote in 1979.

...If you got this far and have not fallen asleep, here is my ten minute video that goes into a little more detail:

An Indictment of the present Scientific Community

"Time, Gentlemen please..." 1985

Andrea Rossi and Defkalion, claiming as much as 20 units of energy created for every one unit of input. Indeed, very interesting subject.

While in process writing about this, one for my blog commentary, the other for the DailyKos.com, I came to realize that this subject needed desperately to segue into a much larger, darker and more insidious story.

During my attempts to collect information on the subject of energy catalyzers, I was somewhat surprised at the distinct lack of interest in scientific quarters, and it has gradually dawned on me to what degree the so-called empirical science forums, such as physicsforums.com and scienceforums.net have ossified. This realization began when I went looking for research information on Andrea Rossi and Defkalion at these forums and found discontinued threads.

Emailing a PhysicsForum.com moderator, I asked him why all LENR posts seem to be abruptly terminated, he responded,

"The current consensus among the Mentors is that Cold Fusion needs to be demonstrated and documented in mainstream peer-reviewed scientific journal articles before it can be discussed on the PF."

"...needs to be demonstrated..."? Isn't the whole point of scientific discovery? If this was 1902, would one not be allowed to discuss the possibility of powered flight? Determining what is possible and what is not, is a messy business, it is the meat of scientific debate. Is a shutting down of discourse not an appeasing abdication to this tenant? Is this turning of the back nothing less than scientific cowardice?

It's almost like watching a replay of the 18th century French Academy of Sciences encouraging collectors to rid themselves of their meteorites, because rocks falling from the sky was 'nonsense'.

Getting back to Andrea Rossi or Defkalion, what piques my curiosity is that here are two entities who were momentarily coordinating, then separate, but both still aggressively pursuing the same purpose. When charlatans and the delusional break up, it usually ends up with one denouncing other as a pursuer of quackery. That is not happening. There is something in this present interaction which amplifies my suspension of disbelief and causes me to sit up and take notice. I want to know more, and see what intelligent people are thinking about the subject of energy catalyzers.

Let's say for a moment that Defkalion's announcement to allow independent scientific institutions to test their generator yields a positive result. What does that say about the present state of our science method?

Forty years of the supposedly 'scientific' approach, using the 'rational' tools of exploration in the pursuance of controlled hot fusion. Other than than the subsidizing of 'scientists' who have been feeding off of the Department of Energy teat to the tune of countless billions of dollars, what has yielded?

The deafening silence on Andrea Rossi and Defkalion is the tip of the iceberg. Try to find information on the electric universe on Wikipedia, or any information that explains the Sun's retarded rotation. The institutionalized censorship of rational debate it is nothing less than a conspiracy of petty, elite arrogance.

It is a common misconception that the Gutenberg Press made its greatest historical impact due to the publishing of the Bible in the common tongue, rather than Latin, and it is true that this caused much upheaval.

However, what is not largely recognized is the thousands of technical pamphlets that started to appear. "How to Thatch a Roof", "How to build a brick wall", "How to make a pair of shoes". All these technical subjects had until that moment been exclusive domain of the many secretive guilds that flourished, creating an artificial scarcity of information and knowledge. Mere decades after the invention of the Gutenberg Press, the dissemination of knowledge had destroyed the bulk of the exclusive guilds. If a graph could demonstrate a timeline of technological innovation, we would observe a rapid incline, a flourishing of innovation that has only started to level off in our century. It is appropriate to say that over the past centuries, the general public was playing catch-up, absorbing the basic technical know-how that was locked away by the secretive elements of society that wished to benefit at the expense of their species.

We have now reached a new paradigm. With the advent of the Web, history is about to repeat itself. This time, rather than a Technical Revolution, it is a the Revolution of the Epiphany, a revolution where empirical realizations and insights are no longer the exclusive domain of the scientific guild, a social institution which has to date managed to hide behind a cloak of costly journals that in essence exclude the general public.

This must come to an end. It must evolve into a system where scientific journals are thrown open to the public, and ideas must stand on their observational merit, rather than the questionable speculations founded upon a false edifice where one long-bankrupt theory totters upon another.

It is foolish not to include the general public for, as the Gutenberg Press has proved, the general public are the source of innovation and discovery.

Such a point of view is presently viewed with much disdain by the science elite, to the great disadvantage of our civilization. This mindset seems to believe that scientists spontaneously generate like magic, as if never having had any interaction with the general public.

Where does such blinkered narrow-mindedness lead? The shunning of Pons and Fleischman Cold Fusion for publishing directly to the public media was a punishable offence. How dare they illuminate their findings to the great unwashed public, this homogeneous mass that is only fixated on sensational fiction and film stars?

The science mindset buried Pons and Fleischman Cold Fusion for twenty years, and anyone pursuing this subject was ostracized and ejected from what can only be described techno-priesthood. Funds for research on cold fusion dried up, research was discouraged.

Is it any wonder then, that any innovation in this realm that might turn up, emerges from shoe-string garage pioneers stumbling upon something they don't quite understand in an almost alchemic fashion?

This is stating the obvious, but if Andrea Rossi and Defkalion's energy generators are for real, the World will never look the same. The impact of unlimited, pollution-free energy cannot be underestimated - the byproduct of which, is a shamed and discredited science community.

The scientific community has become an inflexible institution, and is beginning to cost our species dearly. There must be change. If not the phenomenon of Andrea Rossi and Defkalion, it will only be a matter of time before some other innovation out of the blue will smash this fraying, defunct paradigm.

I do not relish a scenario in which those dark forces of superstition and religious imposition, continuously battering at the door of scientific empiricism were to find entry. Such a pity then, if the breach is effortlessly brought about by the opening of the door from the inside.

"Money for Nothing and your Chicks for free..." A new Energy Era?

* Update

Having monitored this unfolding energy drama, in a reverse for Andrea Rossi, the editor Sterling D. Allan of Pure Energy Systems News, has backed away from the creator of the E-Cat device and labeled him "Buyer Beware"
"Rossi Tells Florida Bureau He Has No U.S. Factory, No Nuclear Reactions"

Also, a summary of Andrea Rossi's somewhat spotty history.

Article
Chances are really good that you've never heard of Andrea Rossi or Defkalion. However, IF what they have to sell turns out to be the real goods, you certainly will get to know who they are.

So for the duration of this article, I ask you to suspend your sense of disbelief, because the content is so outlandishly ludicrous that it borders on the absurd. Nor would I be writing this, were it not for a persistent spike in my techno web tendrils that seems to demand attention. So. Here we go:

An Italian inventor called Andrea Rossi claims to have created a generator that produces six units of energy for every one unit expended. What's more, only 48 hours ago, Defkalion, the company that Andrea Rossi was formerly cooperating with - has announced it is ready to allow independent sources to test their generator, purportedly able to produce twenty units of energy for every one you put in.
These are claims that - if verified - would make nuclear fusion researchers drool uncontrollably, after which they would discover pink slips on their desks. A sad end after having ridden the cash cow for over forty years with little to show for it.

To date poorly controlled demonstrations have been performed before a reasonable amount of scientists. Some walk away convinced, others cry foul, claiming it to be a hoax or the feverish imaginings of the delusional. Obviously both can't be right, so what is the problem? Why can't the inventors/discoverers just hand over the device and let the scientists of reputable universities test these generators independently?

This is why: We are NOT talking science here. From all I have managed to read and piece together, these enterprises can best be described as modern alchemy. I'm not saying the generators do not work, no - what we may be seeing here is an individual that has stumbled upon something that does not fit within the parameters of known science. Sure, Andrea Rossi and his physicist supporter Sergio Focardi have an explanation but it holds no water with the international patent community.

Respectable scientists have been down this road before and have burned their fingers on the Pons and Fleischman Cold Fusion Affair of twenty years ago, which produced mixed to negative results. Simply put, they really don't want to go there again. Even at this juncture, respectable physics forums such as physicsforums.com refuse to even allow the subject to be discussed.

In a very real sense, one could accuse the science community of cowardice, in that they would rather stick with what they know than delve into the messy unknown, which - after all - is what science is really about.

In consequence, little to no research has been funded in this quarter and has therefore been relegated to the realm of garage tinkerers for the past two decades. Is it any wonder then, that if any progress has been made it must invariably hearken from this realm?

The Rossi/Defkalion competitors are in a quandary: If they don't have a patent and scientists nose around in their secretive generator, the cat will out of the box and they won't hold legal rights to their discovery/invention.
From the observations one can make based on videos available from the demonstrations, we are not talking rocket science here. Rossi and Focardi say the device works by infusing heated hydrogen into nickel and transmuting it into copper and producing heat. Hints of sonic oscillation circulate on various websites.
Fusion with no lingering dangerous radiation. If it melts down, you are left with a pool of hot lead. Hardly white overcoat and clip-board kinda stuff.

It is a guess, but my hunch is that a dedicated hobbyist could probably hobble something like this generator together if they knew how. - And if it is that easy, it would not take long before everyone and his monkey's uncle would be churning out energy devices similar to these and patents be damned. For this reason - if the principals for constructing such generators turn out to be sound - I would be very circumspect about investing in any company with a claim. Here today gone tomorrow.

Implications: Should these energy generators turn out to be the real thing, I cannot even begin to stress the mind-boggling impact this will have on the early part of the 21st Century. If the energy output at this early stage of research has increased from 1-6 output to 1-20 energy output in less than a year, well - you can see where I'm going with this. Residences, Industries, vacuum cleaners, computers, autos, aircraft, space ships - all running on clean, decentralized, non-polluting sustainable free energy. In mere years, the world society we knew will be utterly transformed. I don't want to sound like a paranoid conspiracy theorist, but once this stuff hits the main media, you can be sure the bad boys of our energy-starved world will not be sitting idle, twiddling their thumbs. Frankly, I'm surprised various elements of society let it get this far. There are fortunes to be lost, powerful who will become powerless.
However, if the principal for making these generators is as easy as it seems, chances are good the cat is already too far out of the bag for these vested interests to do any long-term harm.

Bottom line, the jury's out. The truth of it all can only be a matter of months away. Rossi/Defkalion are in fierce competition. Both have to put out or close shop. There is no Pons and Fleischman dawdling here, either it works or it doesn't. Exciting times.

Social revolutions need Software Solutions

A fine time to address the issue of social revolutions, lot's of them going on right now. The Middle East is aflame with them; Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria, Bahrain, Yemen - all in the throws of social upheaval.

Even in the Western World deep murmurings are to be heard, the political ground is beginning a tremble that may lead to social change that is right off the Richter Scale. The 99% are beginning to occupy the mind of the 1%, there is a strong difference of opinion in the air. I'll call anyone a fool who claims to know where all this will lead, but we all know it is leading somewhere.

When the Forces of Evil are overthrown, what then? Typically, revolutions are followed by stumbling attempts of a citizenry to come to grips with some sort of equitable social change, usually ending badly after which the power vacuum is filled by yet another strong man or absolutist institution. Some decades must now pass before the cycle repeats itself.

Already, the citizenry of Libya are thrashing about with no sense of how to go about setting up a means for the equitable distribution of resources, and the eventual outcome is more than likely fo be less than wholesome.
Egypt has always been dogged by dictatorship, backed up by an institutionalized army who's generals are for all intents and purposes, the reigning oligarchy. Behind them, the Muslim Brotherhood eagerly await their turn to wield their religious cudgel to bludgeon the population.

Over the past Century and on a grander scale, we observed Russia convulse with the overthrow of a Tsarist regime, only to be convulsed by the cult of personality in the guise of pseudo Communism. When the USSR nightmare dissolved, it almost immediately morphed into an oligarchy, and from there into a autocracy of ex-KGB cronyists.

In all these instances, what we see are a peoples momentarily casting aside their chains of oppression, but with no means of effecting an immediate legitimate procedure of public debate that may set in motion the proper institutions to secure their hard won freedoms.

Indeed, it is this floundering that attracts and brings forth the opportunists who are ready to fling themselves upon their vulnerable prey.

The main obstacle we need to overcome is our mindset. We have always thought of politicians as a necessary profession, and of course that was very true until the revolution in communication. Even in a republic democracy, politicians played a vital role. We elected them to represent us in the corridors of power, and a central location of rule was vital because of the limitations of distance and time.
What do you need a representative for, when you can do it yourself? The disadvantages of an elected representative are many:
The representative can never fully represent the myriad views of any individual citizen. Furthermore, a representative is prone to corruption, financial gain or blackmail, and finally there is always the lure of absolute power.

However, with this new age of rapid communication technology, distance and time have been swept aside. The only inhibitor that prevents every individual from representing their unique wishes as the sole sun of the representative body, is a means of organizational communication which would allow for such a system to function.

Is there a solution to this endless cycle of repression? Ironically, the solution to untying of this Gordian Knot, is the technology that allowed the Middle Eastern revolutions to succeed in the first place, namely the cell phone and the internet. What us urgently needed for the human race is a scalable 'Roberts Rules of Order' software so that large bodies of people can rapidly come together and make decisions that have the authority of a mandate.

This would make it hard for political predators to insert themselves into the process during this vulnerable window where a power vacuum exists.

In more benign situations where the governed have a stable government and the luxury of time, the citizenry can run a system like this as a 'shadow government', in parallel with the existing government. As it becomes apparent that the electronic system better represents the people, the transfer can take place in gradual stages.

Scalable online debate/discussion software

The World is on the cusp of change.

We have witnessed the revolutions in the Middle East and now, with the Wall Street Protests, there are murmurings for fundamental change in the US. Much of these sweeping changes can be directly attributable to technological advances in communications: The cell phone, the computer and the Web.

What we have now are huge groups of peoples who have effected an overthrow of an old system, but are unable to gather en masse to hammer out important decisions, such as the distribution of resources, human rights, etc. In short a a striving for a government of equals. What has typically happened in the past is that post revolution vacuums allow for strongmen and despots to fill the void. After that, it's the same old song.

The solution is, there needs to be an effective scalable software for very large groups of online people to get together, voice their opinions, discuss, debate - and most important - formulate solutions and agreements. Think of it as an online "Robert's Rules of Order" process. Imagine it working something like Wikipedia, being self-correcting, where the no group with an agenda can wrest control.

If successfully formulated, one possibility is that it could initially be an effective shadow government, paralleling problems governmental institutions face and proposing possible alternative solutions. I imagine folks involved in Occupy Wall Street would love to get their hands on something like that. The media would start paying close attention to the such an online process, because the results would be propagated by a mass of individuals, rather than talking heads and politicians.

Rough outline:

OK, imagine this decision making software is up and running and you want to participate in a particular issue. Let's say it is a new issue and people are just starting to log in to debate. First, the issue needs to be defined, and that is the first page you come to. The issue page is dynamic and subject to change, much like a Wikipedia entry.

Next, you go into discussion. This works very much on the lines of Google Circles: Let's say each circle consists of thirteen individuals, no tie vote, who are randomly thrown together. The volume of circles is scalable, so you may have thousands of individuals discussing the same issue, although each circle contains the same amount of individuals. The Circles have a 'circulating chairman' built in, so no individual, or group of individuals can dominate the direction of the circle discussion/debate.

If an individual simply has to leave feels alienated, they can opt out and return, joining into a new circle. When that happens, a joining member has the option of dropping in, thus retaining the quorum. The text of the discussion can be reviewed by the newcomer, bringing them up to date. Trolls and flamers can be bounced by 3/4 majority vote. That account will be penalized in some form or other, at least removing them from the subject of discussion as a whole.

The end result is a specific proposition or a set of propositions that is hammered out and voted on, the results appearing much like that of an online poll. If you are the first circle to make the proposal(s) and decision(s), the wording and polling results become available for all the proceeding circles to see, plus the procedure of the debate/discussion. They can also see how many circles there are at any given moment. This allows for continuity, in that successive circles can use the same polling wording if they choose, so as the circles report in, their polls are combined together, producing the final result.

Finally, a participant coming into the server can at any time skip to the chase: They can observe the debates, the polls, and vote without going through the debate and discussion.

I realize that this sketch may not look anything like a finalized end-result, I just wanted to whet everyone's imaginations.

Neutrinos preceding radiation and the promise of exact measurement

Of course, the tantalizing evidence that the velocity of light is preceded by the greater speed of neutrinos is all over the news at the moment.

It would seem that we stand on the cusp of being able to precisely measure the distance of powerful bursts of energy, such as a nova.

I recall a few years ago that a burst of radiation from supernova SN1987A was preceded by a burst of neutrinos three hours before the radiation.

It follows that if we can produce a source of radiation emission such as that created by the OPERA international experiment, then we can calibrate the exact amount of time it takes light and neutrinos to get from point A to point B,

By calculating the time delay between light and neutrinos, we would know with considerable exactness the distance if a given emission.

Addendum:

I went to Bautforum.com and one of the brighter members had this to say, "If the 20ppm difference detected by CERN is true, then SN1987a was ~18ly away by this method.

First thing I did when I saw the first thread here was actually run the numbers. At 160000ly, the neutrino burst should have arrived 3 years beforehand..."

There are few easy answers in science, and this ain't one of 'em.