I copy paste here a published article in the proceedings of a University Conference on Innovation.
WHAT ARE THE NECESSARY CONCEPTUAL CHANGES IN PHYSICS FOR DISCOVERING THE ENERGY OF THE FUTURE.
In this paper we outline the necessary conceptual changes, in fundamental university physics, so as to support the emerging invention of the energy of the future. We give also a short historic and epistemological review of the development of physics the last few centuries.
The goal of the paper is to outline the successful perception of physical reality which will allow for a future, global, clean , safe and cheap energy. It is not the goal to introduce new quantitative equations or attempt a full and quantitative complete explanation of existing innovative inventions (of “free energy”).It is more conceptual and epistemological, which is useful also to find our way among a great number of relevant inventions.
2. What is the energy of the future?
We define as energy of the future, energy which is
1. Clean (from CO2 emissions)
2. Fully Safe and not explosive or destructive.
3. Of not very expensive and complicated technology (smart).
5. Able to support continuously increasing or unexpected demand of power.
What is the current situation with the so called “free energy”? Here are the facts: This “free-energy” seems renewable, it is cheaper than oil, and it is clean. There is an increasing number of genuine inventors from the 20 to the 21st century. There is almost absolute inability of the University Physics to account for these inventions (“they should not release extra energy according to the university physics” they say) There are many interpolation of fake inventions or frauds. There is failure sooner or later to create high profile, large scale commercialized products of it. Some inventors or relevant business become the victim of neo-nazi terrorism.
2. The non-explanation explanations
Some attempted explanations of the “free-energy” devices are based on the “energy of the quantum vacuum”. It is known in elementary particle physics, that the energy is only in the average conserved. But here in the average it is not conserved, if accounted with the conventional physical reality concepts.
And even if it was conserved in the average, an explanation that this energy comes from the absolute quantum vacuum, that is from zero and nothingness , it is obviously a no-explanation.
What is not to trust in attempted explanations?
The previous “quantum vacuum” energy approaches and some other attempts with obscure twisting of existing concepts, have one common property: The try to explain the measured extra energy, in "free energy" devices without changing almost nothing in the rest of the conceptual system , equations and theories of physics. I believe that this is an indication that the explanation is neither too much correct, neither comprehensive enough to account for almost all such devices. It is an indication that the explanation should not be trusted, in the sense that it is not the one that will eventually change the face fundamental theoretical of physics.
3. The glorious story of “the atoms” in the science of physics
For at least half a century, chemists were writing H20 and H2SO4 etc but they did not accept the existence of …atoms. The theory of “phases” of matter (an extension of the 3 phases of solid, liquid and gaseous) was the theoretical University Status Quo. Much like the current theories of empty space-time and quantum vacuum.
Boltzmann had developed his statistical atomic theory of the gasses, but it was not an accepted theory. The existence of atoms was accepted after a small paper by A. Einstein in 1905, which explained the Brownian motion, by the existence of atoms. With that he took the Nobel prize! And the Brownian motion was an experiment known since 1820…So it is not the experimental facts that were missing but the correct attitude and perception about the physical reality.
Here we have obviously a phenomenon of “delay” in the evolution of physics.
What we observe with the story of the atomic theories, till the final acceptance of the existence of atoms, is that there was a delay of at least 50 years.
In this we do not include gifted individuals like I. Newton who in his private letters to his friends, he was claiming that he was absolutely sure that matter consists from atoms, already some centuries before 1905. Or the atomic theories of the ancient Greek philosophers Lefkipos and Democritous.
I think history is repeating with the “free-energy” devices, and I think that the main cause of such “delays” in the development in the science of physics are due to the complications of negative will towards evolution of the civilization.
4. The 20th century approach about physical reality.
The 20th century concept of physical reality was (and in some extent still is) based on:
1) There is no finer physical reality of free, permanent particles smaller than the proton, neutron, electron. (the majority of quantum particles are not permanent and quarks are not free). Thus anything beyond the known is a quantum-vacuum. (Already a logical error: what you cannot trace as particles experimentally is not a proof that they do not exist as material reality, given that you can trace it as a field with inertia and momentum).
2) Light is a particle (photon) and not a wave of a finer material reality. Nothing goes faster than photons
3) The quartet of classical atomic physics photon, neutron, electron, proton gives essentially all the known physical reality.
4) The physical reality is “one sheet” not “many-sheets” or layers or frequencies (the frequency here being the average of the spin of protons, electrons, neutrons or more precisely the DeBroglie-Compton frequency).
Here we may observe that the current, quantum particle physics is a dead-end
It is looking in the wrong space-time scale (atomic particles) Either it should concentrate on classical laboratory scale experiments (the smart approach) , or to a radically smaller space-time reality of particles (10^36 times smaller, the advanced approach) and the latter the current earthly technology does not permit it.
It is using very poor concepts, like wave-particle duality, light as photon-particle, nothing goes faster than light, empty-space-time, quantum vacuum etc.
The current quantum particle physics was designed to improve the nuclear weapons. Not to find new sources of clean, non-war-weapons ,energy. That is why it is also scientifically a dead end, as it is also morally a dead-end.
Seemingly success like the verification of Higgs mass-field in accelerators , or “negative-sign-dark-energy” between remote galaxies, are indicative of the inappropriateness of the available concepts and may make an awakened physicist uncomfortable.
5. A 2nd level of atoms and layer of material reality: A new perception of the physical reality.
It seems that a very comprehensive perception of the physical reality, is that the tree of creation of matter, from 3 permanent free particles (proton, neutron, electron) is repeated at a finer space-time scale and frequency (By frequency of the matter here we mean the Compton-De Broglie frequency of the electrons of the matter see e.g.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compton_wavelength http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_wave#Electrons )
In other words we repeat this creation at a space-time scale 10^36 time smaller (about the comparison of a proton to the size of a star), and we substitute the quantum vacuum with a finer material reality created by micro-protons, micro-neutrons, and micro-electrons.
This is an instance of a leveled concept of atomicity of matter, and can be repeated more than twice that we suggest here.
As in the classical 1st story of the atoms it was the Brownian motion that was the proof that atoms exist, similarly the well known Shroendinger motion of particles like electrons etc, in the “vacuum” can be the proof of the existence of the 2nd micro-resolution reality atoms created by micro-electrons, micro-neutrons and micro-protons. Either we accept as proof or as it is well known we should have to abandon the principle of sufficient physical causes (as Von Neumann had remarked) for such random motions of electrons in the vacuum (where “nothing” waves them)
The approach of the future is expected to be the acceptance of :a 2nd frequency and micro-resolution material reality
So here is the anticipated evolution in the science of physics: Not a new cumbersome field of “empty-space-time” or quantum vacuum, that correct and unifies electromagnetism and gravitation, but this unification through the fluid dynamics of matter, of a finer material micro-resolution reality.
It is not a better field theory in the vacuum that we need, but to realize that we are dealing with a finer material reality, where the light is not a “particle” but a wave in the finer material reality, a non-linear wave, that in high frequencies it may behave as if a particle.
We do not accept energy , momentum and inertia as properties of the empty space or vacuum, or of field (the field as non-matter) in vacuum , but any energy, momentum and inertia are properties of matter and not of vacuum or field in vacuum.
Table 1: Material reality of at least 2 layers-frequencies.
1st frequency material reality
(the average frequency of the spin)
Creating free-permanent triad
(proton, neutron, electron) and of course for anti-matter anti-triad
Solid objects, liquids, gases
Organic living configurations:
Yes Known Biology
2nd frequency material reality
(the average frequency of the spin)
Creating free-permanent triad of aetherons (maybe 10^36 times smaller that those of 1st frequency)
(micro-proton, micro-neutron, micro-electron) and of course for anti-matter anti-triad
Electromagnetic , Gravitational fields
Organic living configurations:
Yes Unknown e.g. Human aetheric body.
Let us try now to discuss from where comes the so called “free energy”
The devices or inventions of the so called “free-energy” are so numerous and of increasing number, that it would be a surprise that almost all of them would have the same explanation in all the details.
Therefore any general qualitative not fully quantitative perspective of the source of their energy, should follow very broad and general concepts.
So the suggested here general perspective is that, since there is not really quantum vacuum, or empty-space time, the source of this energy should be the various forms of energy of the 2nd frequency and resolution micro-physical reality, like e.g. heat, which is the at least one next step of physical reality after that of protons, neutrons and electrons. In other words energy much relevant to the energy content of this that we call “fields” like gravitation and electromagnetism. And the reason of course that we cannot account so far for this energy is that we do not perceive the fields as a 2nd micro-resolution physical reality.Now it may turn out that this heat of the 2nd micro-resolution material reality (or classical fields) may be supported by the infrared solar radiation. That would not be strange at all, and it would turn the so called “free-energy” to indirect solar energy stored in the 2nd micro-resolution reality (and also potential of the new universal attraction).
6. The current feasible attitude of the University Research
Repeat experiments of “free-energy” devices in University laboratories and validate the extraction of energy.No error, no deception. Do not yet attempt a full explanation to account for the appearing extra energy.
E.g. Tadahiko Mizuno (Hokkaido University) of excess heat at high voltage-electrolysis of water, published at the Japanese Journal of applied physics (see e.g. http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoThydrogenev.pdf)
Some beliefs of modern physics that may turn out to be wrong.
1) The inertial mass of bodies ( of constant amount of molecular matter) at low speed (non-relativistic) cannot be decreased below the inertia of the rest mass.
2) All matter starts with protons, neutrons, electrons. In other words, there are not smaller free permanent particles (Quantum particles are excluded as they are not permanent or free)
3) Nothing goes faster than photons
4) All macroscopic electromagnetic interactions are described with the linear equations of Maxwell.
5) All forces acting on laboratory macroscopic objects at low speed (non-relativistic) are of the next 5 types a) Inertial, b) by contact with other material bodies made from protons, neutrons, electrons, c) Newtonian gravitation forces d) Maxwell's electromagnetic forces e) no other type of forces.
What is more likely the case
1) It is possible under special conditions to have radical decrease of the inertia of the rest mass of a body in slow motion
2) Aether is a 2nd material reality made from permanent particles of positive negative and neutral charge, transcendentally finer than protons-neutrons-electrons and the electromagnetic and gravitational field is aspects of the functions of aether.
3) To say than nothing goes faster than light in aether, is like saying than no airplane can go faster than the sound, in air.
4) The linear Maxwell equations of electromagnetism are correct only for a limited realm of experiments those discovered at the end of the 19th century, not all laboratory scale experiments that we now know. They need revision, and their correct version include parameters of gravitation too, and are non-linear.
5) Besides, inertial forces, classical electromagnetic forces and Newtonian and Einsteinian gravitational forces, and forces by contact of bodies, exist also a 5th type of macroscopic laboratory scale forces on bodies from the rest of the gravitational field that we do not know. (In underground physics, this unknown field is called anti-gravity or the classical gravity is called aether-statics and this field, aether-dynamic field of the neutral aether)
Here we state 3 conjectures and keys for the further advancement of the fundamental physics towards, discovering a future clean , and cheaper renewable energy.
To simplify terms lets call aether, the gaseous 2nd-frequency matter , in the previous table.
1) The 1st ket to start understanding the mechanism behind the inverse square law of Newton, in universal attraction or gravitation is the identification: The Newtonian gravitational scalar potential φ is proportional to the gaseous 2nd frequency matter temperature gasseous matter.Both the presence of matter and infrared solar radiation contribute to the creation of the above (aether) heat that in its turn creates gravity. But the factor of infrared solar radiation seems to be the major.
2) The 2nd key is : The scalar electromagnetic potential a0 is proportional to the pressure of the non-neutral aether (or non-neutral gaseous 2nd frequency material density)
3) The 3rd key is:The vector electromagnetic potential A is proportional to the vector of momentum of the non-neutral aether ( or non-neutral gaseous 2nd frequency material density).
What is needed is an awakened attitude from the Scientifics of physics in the universities.
A systematic reproduction of the “free energy” devices in University laboratories Altruism and not private interests from the side of the inventors. Thorough critique of the existing theories of the classical fields of laboratory scale electromagnetism and Einstein’s gravitation.
References (indicative only of the history of physics.)
[Aspden,H] a)Anti-gravity electronics Electronic &Wireless WorldJanuary 1989 b)The theory of AntigravityPhysical Essays Volume 4,number 1 1991.http://www.aspden.org/` http://www.energyscience.co.uk/books.htmlhttp://www.padrak.com/ine/NEN_4_8_1.html
[Bohm D.-Vigier J.P.] “Model of the causal interpretation of quantum theory in terms of a fluid with irregular fluctuations “Physical Review 96pp 208-216 (1954)
[Dirac P.A.M] Is there an eather?Proc.Roy.Soc. A.209 ,291 ,(1951)
[Donald Reed] (addedd 2012) Beltrami vector fields in Electrodynamics: A reason for re-eamining The structural foundations of classical field physics? Modern Nonlinear Optics, Part 3, Second Edition: Advances in Chemical Physics, Volume 119. Edited by Myron W. Evans. Series Editors: I. Prigogine and Stuart A. Rice. Copyright # 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBNs: 0-471-38932-3 (Hardback); 0-471-23149-5
[Hayasaka,H.Tackeuchi S.] Phys. Rev. Lett 63, 2701 (1989)
[ Itzycson ClaudeZuber Jean-Bernard] Quantum Field Theory
[Kyritsis Constantine 1998: The Lancaster Lecture. http://thenewuniversalattraction.blogspot.gr/2012/10/20-from-lancaster-lecture.html