Our vision is that the progress of physics requires respect to the physics heritage.

From: Bruce Lamar Rosenberg <brues.1@comcast.net>

Subject: Amrit Sorli et al Energy - Mass -Gravity Theory first page.

Hi Folks,
Thought you might be interested in this.
The entire text is available as a .pdf file.
Bruce

*Energy - Mass -Gravity Theory*
Amrit Sorli1, Magi Mageshwaran2. David Fiscaletti3
'Foundations of Physics Institute, Idrija, Slovenia    •
2St: Joseph's College; Physics. Department, Bangalore, India 3Space Life Institute, San Lorenzo in Campo (PU), Italy
Email address:
sorli.ainrit@gmail.com (A. Sorli), magesh.phys@gmail.com (M. Mageshwaran), spacelife.institute@gmail.com (D. Fiscaletti)
To cite this article:
Amrit Sorli, Magi Mageshwaran, David Fiscaletti. Energy - Mass - Gravity Theory. American Journal of Modem Physics. Special Issue: Insufficiency of Big Bang Cosmology. Vol. 5, No. 4-1, 2016, pp. 20-26. do: 10.11648/j.ajmp.s.201605040U4
Received: February 22, 2016; Accepted: March 15, 2016; Published: April 8, 2016
Abstract: The electromagnetic quantum vacuum of QED empowered with the Planck energy density is a model which comprehensively describes the origin of energy, mass, gravity and antigravity. A photon is a wave of quantum vacuum and has energy and so according to the mass-energy equivalence principle, a corresponding mass. A massive particle is a structure of quantum vacuum whose rest mass diminishes the energy density of the quantum vacuum, which generates mass and gravity. The kinetic energy of a relativistic particle originates from the quantum vacuum.
Keywords: Mass, Energy, Quantum Vacuum, Gravity, Antigravity, Higgs Mechanism, Gravitational Waves

*INTRODUCTION (1)*
In the Energy-Mass-Gravity Theory (EMG Theory), the electromagnetic dynamic quantum vacuum (DQV) intended as a super-fluid medium consisting of an enormous amount of processes of creation/annihilation of particles-antiparticles is the fundamental background which determines a unifying view of energy, mass and gravity. The DQV energy as the fundamental energy of the universe cannot be created and cannot be destroyed. DQV is a unified system governing the processes taking place in the micro and the macro world. DQV is dynamic in the sense that the presence of a given stellar object or elementary particle (or interaction) reduces the amount of the quantum vacuum energy with respect to the Planck energy density. The appearance of material objects and subatomic particles 'corresponds to changes in the quantum vacuum energy density and thus can be considered as the excited states of the same DQV. In other words, energy and matter can be seen as different forms of DQV energy. Each particle is made out of DQV energy [1 ].
A magnetic field can be seen as a wave of quantum vacuum on the surface XY, and the electric field can be seen as a wave of quantum vacuum on the surface XZ. A photon is a wave of quantum vacuum in XYZ. The fields are composed of waves of the quantum vacuum. The physical fields are not different entities with respect to the quantum vacuum: the fields are themselves physical properties of the quantum vacuum in the sense that they are excitations of quantum vacuum determined by vibrations of opportune regions corresponding to the appropriate fluctuations of the quantum vacuum energy density. Electric and magnetic fields are two different kinds of polarization of the DQV produced by the frequencies associated with the motion of the virtual particles of the creation/annihilation processes. As a consequence of the evolution of the creation/annihilation processes, namely the motion of the virtual particles-antiparticles generated in these processes, different modes of the fundamental DQV are generated, where each mode corresponds to an independent oscillation defined by the frequency produced by a specific process of creation/annihilation of quanta associated with the elementary fluctuations of the DQV.
Our vision is that the progress of physics requires respect to the physics heritage. Quantum electrodynamics. (QBD) belong to the heritage of physics. In QED the velocity of light is defined by quantum vacuum permittivity and permeability which is described by c = — — . This means
that the quantum vacuum is a concrete medium which exists in the entire universe. Planck's metrics also belong to the heritage of physics. Accordingly to the Planck metrics, each Planck volume Vp of space has an amount of Planck energy

The correctness of this statement emphasizes the incorrectness of the 3 other statements.

From: uitterdijk <sjaakenlutske@hetnet.nl> Subject: Potential energy Dear physicist, While developing a digital model for orbiting objects I once again experienced the problem with the conventional definition of potential energy. The first time was when I was writing the article: http://vixra.org/pdf/1505.0225v5.pdf ‘Why a Photon is not a Particle’.  It now turned out that the problem still hadn’t been solved. In the present version 5 the problem is definitively solved.  Applying the alternative definition of potential energy in the presented photon model, this model now shows that the magnetic energy in an atom (with one electron) equals the kinetic energy of this electron.  And it shows that this magnetic energy eventually is the source that delivers the energy of the photon. The fundamental problem of the conventional definition of potential energy is indirectly but clearly shown in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_orbital I scratched out the wrong words and wrote the correct ones behind them in italics. Orbital energy In atoms with a single electron ......., the energy of an orbital ...... is determined exclusively by n.  The n=1 orbital has the lowest highest possible energy in the atom.  Each successively higher value of n has a higher lower level of energy, but the difference decreases as n increases *.  For high n, the level of energy becomes so high low that the electron can easily escape from the atom. *          The Rydberg expression is meant here: E = hf = hc * R∞ * (1/n12 - 1/n12) Example:                         n1                     n2             (1/n12 - 1/n12)                         1                      2                      0,75                         5                      6                      0,012                         10                   11                     0,0017 The example above shows the correctness of the statement: “......but the difference decreases as n increases”.  The correctness of this statement emphasizes the incorrectness of the 3 other statements. If even such an obviously wrong description of such a simple phenomenon determines the thoughts about a fundamental property of an atom, what, for god’s-sake, might have happened more in physical science? In http://vixra.org/pdf/1709.0440v1.pdf and in the attachment you will find the background for the recovery of this fundamental mistake by means of a much more direct and common sense definition of potential energy. Kind regards,  Sjaak Uitterdijk

its design is based on a nonsense theory.

From: uitterdijk <sjaakenlutske@hetnet.nl> Subject: High energy particles
Dear Physicist, You herewith are informed about the article titled: Velocity of cosmic muons most likely much higher than c The abstract sounds: It seems to be the most attractive experiment for physicists, who strongly believe in the validity of the STR, to refer to: the supposed half-life time, in combination with their supposed velocity, of muons entering the atmosphere. The crucial part of the experiment is the application of the equation E=mc2. This article shows that, by applying this equation, the one error in STR is used to prove the apparent validity of another error in this theory. The article also shows how extremely magical physics has become. Scientists should, due to their position in society, only think logically The article is found at: http://vixra.org/pdf/1708.0087v1.pdf For those who do, for whatever reason, not want to visit viXra, the article is attached too. Kind regards,    Sjaak Uitterdijk

*******************************************8

From: uitterdijk <sjaakenlutske@hetnet.nl> Subject: HEP reaction Dear Physicist, One, out of the 7000 addressed physicists, did react upon my e-mail with the subject “High Energy Particles”. He is a long term expert on HEP. His reaction is, to my opinion, representative for the majority of physicists, regarding their attitude with respect to the STR. For that reason I want to inform you about this reaction and my reply on it. I changed his name in Messenger. See the attachment: "reply to the messenger”. Again to my opinion the meant attitude can be described as: ignore whichever evidence showing the invalidity of the STR. In my reply I wrote the sentence: “Great! But if you would be a genuine scientist you would wonder why the synchrotron works so perfectly, while its design is based on a nonsense theory. “ After all I should have added the following consideration. At the moment Einstein rejected correctly the ether model, he would, if he would have been a genuine scientist, have wondered himself why Fresnel once deduced a correct mathematical description of the velocity of light in a moving medium. Fresnel did so by applying the ether model! The correctness of this description has later on been proved experimentally by Fizeau. Einstein never even mentioned this problem. I met this problem too at the moment I proved, in the most fundamental thinkable way (shown in the other attachment), that the reference for the velocity of light in vacuum must be its source. The solution of this problem is simple: take the source as reference for the velocities applied in Fresnel’s expression and nothing has to be changed in his expression. Fizeau’s experiment is necessarily carried out in this way, because the medium moved with respect to the source and the light did so too! Hopefully you will, for one time, lay aside your religious-like believe in the validity of the STR, if applicable, and read the two attachments.
Kind regards,
Sjaak Uitterdijk

important discounts in the future for your nation

SUPERCONDUCTIVITY – NEWSLETTER FOR PHYSICS

            It was my intention to add another article about General Relativity to this newsletter, but this thing was not possible. Modern society has considered my abilities are suitable for a sewage job and after 11 hours of daily work in the field there is little time for science; so the physics version of this newsletter is similar to the chemistry one with some small improvement to the text.

If by any chance you have friends to an US university or at CERN please forward this email to them too. These institutions are still banning my domain and the delivery of any email to their scientists; they are stranded and not all of them are happy with this situation.

            The newsletter starts with a shocking situation which has not been observed for more than a century: the Kirchoff’s laws are not respected in case of superconductors’ circuits but who cares!?….

In order to have a current which continues to run into the loop after the source is removed, the incoming current cannot split at the junction so the first law is disrespected.  

The second law of Kirchhoff is not respected too. Only the simple fact that, a superconductor loop or coil can store ,,electric energy” and this energy can be released later  when it is necessary, should have risen the question: how this thing is possible ?  How do we have a closed path and the voltage around this path is zero and yet someone can extract energy in these conditions?

A simple analysis of the practical procedure of storing electric energy into a superconductor coil reveals how both Kirchoff’s laws are discarded even for a schoolboy.

            The most obvious characteristic of a superconductor is the complete disappearance of its electrical resistance below a temperature that is known as its critical temperature.

It is considered that quantum theory of superconductivity published in 1957 by John Bardeen, Leon Cooper and John Schrieffer (BCS theory) explains in a satisfactory manner the properties of superconductors and of course this theory received also a Noble prize in 1972. 

At a glance and without being a scientist, the BCS theory should have been discarded immediately after publishing. It is a pity that those physicists who proposed this theory for Nobel Prize and implicitly the members of Nobel commission have never heard about the existence of covalent bonds and the existence of superconductibility in semiconductors or even nonmetallic compounds; probably a course in introductory chemistry was necessary for them and this is also necessary for scientists working in the field today.

All non metallic elements (including what physicists define as semiconductors) have covalent bonds between atoms and according to quantum mechanics there is no delocalization of electrons in case of covalent compounds. Probably someone is going to think that such covalent compounds under a certain temperature and pressure are going to become metallic and this case is analyzed too.

The question is: how do we define a metallic state or how do we differentiate a metallic state from a molecular one?

To date, the answer to the question has been a very simplistic one: if molecular structure becomes conductor of electricity it was considered implicitly that a metallic state was attaint.

In the new proposed theory a lot of modified or stressed molecular states are going to acquire some of the properties of a metallic state. The fact a molecular structure becomes conductor or even superconductor at certain temperature is not a sine qua non condition that a metallic state was obtained. There is necessary to have more strict criteria which frame the concept of metallic state and these are presented in the newsletter.

What is the experimental reality in the field?  Well to name but a few, in certain conditions phosphorous, iodine, germanium, silicon and even oxygen appears to be superconductors.

From the dependence of the critical temperature T_c on the isotopic mass it was accepted that lattice vibrations and hence electron-lattice interactions are deeply involved in superconductivity. This was considered a fundamental discovery; no other reason has been found to explain the dependency of superconducting transition temperature on the number of neutrons in the nucleus.

In the new proposed theory the dependence of T_c from isotopic mass of atom has another explanation. The nuclei and their movement are like ballast for the superconductivity phenomenon. The decoupling of thermal effect from electrical conductibility effect is going to be dependent on the mass of nuclei and the variation of T_c with isotopic mass appears as natural and logic.

BCS theory is never going to explain why the thermal effect is decoupled from the electric effect.

In order to clear the things in this direction a postulate is going to be formulated and the consequences of this postulate are valid for a larger type of phenomenon not only for superconductibility.

Postulate:

Coherent or incoherent beams/pairs of electrons always lose energy as result of their interaction with matter constituents (nuclei or other electrons).

For the modern science, the magnetic effects around a superconductor are a mix of absurd concepts which produce more confusion than explain something in the field.

Superconductors are considered perfect diamagnetic materials but on the other hand they exhibit quite curious magnetic properties like the ,,levitation of a superconductor above a magnet’’.

The use of term levitation for the succession of experiments up presented is confusing and therefore I am going to avoid the use of this term further on. In our case the effect is more subtle and complex and therefore magnetic anchorage seems to be a more appropriate term. If the magnet is displaced laterally, the new magnetic material follows the magnet. If the entire system is turned upside down, the new magnetic material still remains anchored to the magnet

 From the perspective of the new theory this is a completely new effect in science and only a conceptual explanation is offered. 

The correct interpretation of these properties cannot be done without some new concepts already presented into previous newsletters. i.e. the new concepts for chemical bonds, for electric current and for temperature.

The explanation of magnetic anchorage is quite banal: in the superconductor material there is a succession of antiparallel orientated magnels (electron magnetic moments).

When such superconductor material is placed into a magnetic field, these magnels executes a precession motion around the direction of the magnetic field.

Supplementary half of the magnels are attracted toward magnet and half of them are repelled due to their relative orientation; in this way the interaction between a magnet and a superconductor material is a simultaneously attraction and repulsion and this fact generate the anchorage.

Last but not least last section present a ,,letter for the future” and this letter is going to be send to most academia around the world. It is necessary to be done as a proof of evidence for the future that someone rang the bell for an alarming situation and none bothered to take measures.

Letter for the future - Getting support for changing the world….

For some people the content of this letter and the imminence of some corrective actions may seem not necessary. In few yeas the situation is going to be completely different and the future will have to answer to a very basic question: how this thing was possible?

How do we continue to repeat the errors of history and although we think we have built a democratic and progressist society, in reality the opposite is true: each time some people get in power they seize the power and reject any inconvenient truth. The progress of human society would be better assessed by observing the sophistication of repression methods in different epochs and not looking for some devices built in that time.

Another striking reality is the worst for the modern society though: truth has no intrinsic value at all; what has value is the appearance of truth and how someone can get around facts and present them into a convincing and convenient manner.

As you may already know, a new technology of producing electricity emerged on the market as result of a single individual contribution; supplementary, a new ,,all in one electrical generator” has also been invented.

It was not possible to publish this new technology in the official journals and therefore it has been published online.

            With some small structural modifications and changing the working fluid, a common power plant can multiply its output keeping the same input of materials and workforce; needles to say the impact of this technology on climate change, environmental pollution and electricity price.

            How long do we need to damage our planet until such simple technology gets implemented?

I wrote a letter to the DG Energy at the European Commission, but they are busy organizing meetings about topic and not looking for solutions. Other letters were sent to some companies involved in electricity production but to date only one bothered to answer. Its answer is very straightforward: they are not interested to finance and promote a new technology of energy production.  

            I would like to get the support of your institution for further developing and implementing this new technology into practice.

Previously requests made to some Nobel Committee or other research organizations have been either ignored or received a negative answer. As far these are private organization, their option has to be respected. They overplayed their hand and they have to leave the scene of science soon.

 I hope to get a positive answer from Swedish Academy though, as far this institution represents the interest of a nation.

Although part of my ideas is free to read on internet, it does not mean the new proposed theory is going to be offered for free.

An investment into this theory now could mean important discounts in the future for your nation.

Modern society with its democratic but irresponsible structures destroyed my entire scientific carrier and implicitly my existence. You cannot imagine what it really means to be an east European scientist unwanted by a wealthy and influential western society.

I will never become the scientist I wanted to be, but at least I want to be sure that such things are not going to be repeated in the future. It is my firm intention to use the intellectual rights of this theory as a lever in order to perform important changes in what we call ,,modern society”.

If you think you can afford waiting another time interval until muddy waters are settled, please think again!

Anyone who wants to use the new proposed theory as basis for future research and development has to know that fees are to be paid from the moment the theory was already ready for publishing and not from the moment someone endorses it. As example, the theory of gravitation was ready for publishing in 1995 and atomic structure in 2000. Someone who is going to change gears toward my theories in 2030, it has to pay backwards the fees from 1995 respectively 2000 for the up reminded theories.

You can judge by yourself the value of the new proposed theory if you analyze a simple statistic with expenses dedicated to exact sciences and other related sciences for your nation in the last two decades.

If a nation or an entire society have afforded to spend hundreds of billions on stupidities and absurdities, by sure they have to learn the price for some valuable things.

Otherwise, there is the option to wait until my intellectual rights finish, i.e. more than a century in the future.

It is going to be the end of an entire world but not the end of the world. It is your option to make at least a good impression for the last meters of the race and prepare the future of your nation.

The warming up period for publishing has finished and now it is high time to enter into the field with the heavy artillery. There is going to be a series of newsletters which are going to shatter what has remained (if any!) from what we call modern science.

Here is a short list of topics which are already in progress:

• Superconductivity
• Electric discharges and quantum absurdity
• Photoelectric effect and quantum absurdity
• New theory of electrolytic dissociation
• Time, relativity and reality
• The combustible of the future
• Our solar system evolution
• Earth and its geology
• States of matter
• Temperature and relativity
• Ohm law and resistivity concept
• Cooling with lasers and quantum absurdity-The true face of Bose Einstein condensate
• Supernovae and universe expansion
• Pulsars and relativity
• Brownian motion
• Diffusion laws

…and the list is going to be updated ….

            I am looking forward to hearing from you.

            Sincerely

           Sorin Cosofret

a streaming of a grid of vacuum marbles

From: "Albertus P. Kiekens" <physicsleandra@gmail.com> Subject: TONE This is TONE, a Theory Of Nearly Everything. It is rejected by arXiv and Science. I have no affiliation to any institute and now I am looking for persons who want to discuss with me about the subject. If you consider it an interesting article, you may forward it to persons of your own science group, if you think they are interested. Yours sincerely, Bert Kiekens Hygieaplein 25 hs 1076 RP Amsterdam Abstract. This TONE leans on two pillars, both completely new. The first pillar, chapter 1 “GRAVITATION”, describes gravitation as a streaming of a grid of vacuum marbles. The Newton gravitation law is derived. The distance of the vacuum marbles is calculated at 10^-21 meter. This formulation allows to describe its backward time evolving behavior, which is worked out in chapter 2 “EXPANSION OF THE UNIVERSE”. It is presented as a candidate for the Dark Energy. TONE's second main pillar is chapter 3 “QUANTUM QUATERNION DYNAMICS” (QQD). It replaces the colors of QCD by imaginary units of quaternions: red = i, green = j, blue = k, cyan = -i, magenta = -j, yellow = -k, white = 1 and black = -1. The matrix of each quaternion unit equals the product of two Pauli matrices, except for -1. Heavily resting on both pillars is chapter 4 “QUATERNION GRAVITATION”. The vacuum marbles are filled in with pairs of spin 1 gluons. The gluon as being the strongest and fastest reacting particle, builds spacetime, the grid to which all events are attached. Higgs Mechanism 2 shows 2 vacuum marbles at the spot of a quark convert into 1 empty spot and 1 Higgs field particle. Higgs mechanism 2 provides mass AND is the mechanism of attraction between quarks. Higgs mechanism 2 cannot give mass to sole color, but two colors together will always be given mass - except when they are of opposing sign. A black quark can appear, a quark without color: the leptons? If so then the universe might consist of quarks alone. Finally in chapter 5 “INTRICACIES” is shown how four quarks appearing in 2 quark antiquark pairs, all within their time borders, can form all colored gluons we know. One strong force cycle of time then must be rather 0.5 times 10^-24 s. End of abstract.

a new world of "Free Torque"

Dear Professor,

                 I'm an electrical engineer retired from the state electricity board Kerala in India. I'm a researcher also. I have developed a free torque which is having no anti-torque at all. The principle may look against the Newton's third law of motion. Following is a detailed write-up and also a video demonstration of the subject. Kindly find time to go through it and if possible please let me know your feedback.

You tube link of the video demonstration:
https://youtube/V4VJ2nU1nWI

Thanks & Regards,

Kurian George
Rtd. Executive Engineer, KSEB
Thekkinkadu New House
Areeplachi P.O., Punalur,
Kerala, India.
PIN - 691333.

Phone:-
91 475 2277888 (Home)
91 9447028700 (Mobile)

Email:-

kuriangeorgewt@gmail.com

The Free Torque

"The Free Torque" is defined as torque without anti-torque. Newton's laws of motion are real and accepted by the world's scientific community. His third law of motion says, “To every action there is an equal and opposite reaction”. Based on this law, it can be safely claimed “to every torque, there is an anti-torque which is equal in magnitude, but opposite in direction”. This principle is also correct and accepted by the world's scientific community.

A body remaining in space at stand still cannot move whatever type of energy it has in it. If motion has to be started, it requires a second object (mass) for taking up the reaction (reacting force). Then due to the force (action) the body which was initially at rest starts moving and the second body moves in the opposite direction using the reaction (reacting force).

When a bullet is fired from a gun, the bullet moves forward using the force which we call as action. But using the reaction (reacting force) the gun moves backward. This is also called as recoil of the gun. Action and reaction are equal in magnitude, but operate in opposite directions.

Another aspect to be analyzed is whether the above two, equal forces - action and reaction - contribute the same quantity of energy to the above two bodies, bullet and gun having different masses. Further studies show that light bodies (lower mass) are acquiring more energy than heavy bodies (higher mass) and it is inversely proportional to the mass. If the mass of the bullet is 1/100 of the gun, then energy gained by the bullet is 100 times more than the energy gained by the gun using the reaction or recoil. It is pertinent to note that the same quantum of force is applied in both the bullet and the gun in opposite directions.

                                             

It is the reason why boats and airplanes working in low friction mediums of water and air respectively using propellers require more energy for traction. The internationally accepted data shows that diesel barges use 328 BTU of energy and diesel trains use 166 BTU of energy for transporting 1 ton of weight to a distance of 1 kilometer where BTU is the "British Thermal Unit" for energy. Barges and airplanes use propellers for traction and trains use the heavy mass of earth for applying reaction and so the energy lost in the reacting body is negligibly small. It has to be specifically noted that the train works against a big rail friction and barges and airplanes work in mediums of water and air respectively which have very low friction. Therefore it is a paradox. Propeller loss forms major part of energy loss in both the above systems of transportation.

For rotating the main rotor of the Helicopter, torque is required. Then the anti-torque developed is equal in magnitude, but acts in the opposite direction. Here, the anti-torque acts on the Helicopter frame or body, which tends to rotate it in the opposite direction. If the helicopter starts revolving, it is very dangerous and hazardous. To prevent such rotation, a tail end rotor is provided in the Helicopter which creates a torque in the opposite direction of the above anti-torque thereby nullifying it and thus the Helicopter body or frame remains without rotation. But the tail end rotor causes large energy loss.

When more research and studies were conducted in the field of gyroscope technology, the following findings were made. When a wheel is rotated (spun) about its center of gravity along the imaginary X-axis at a very high speed in the order of 10,000 R.P.M, the gyroscopic effect is well experienced. That is, it tends to remain in the same position of rotation (spinning). That is, if an attempt is made to rotate this rotating body in the Y-axis also using a torque, then another torque is seen developed suo moto (automatic) opposing the above attempt to rotate it in the Y-axis. But the body then starts rotating in the Z-axis due to the torque that developed suo moto in the Z-axis. This torque in the Z-axis will cause rotation of the spinning body in the same Z-axis thereby developing energy or work as output. But energy cannot be created or destroyed according to the “law of conservation of energy”. It can only be converted from one form to another or one system to another. Correctly it is seen then that the spinning body starts slowly rotating in the Y-axis also in the direction of the torque applied in the Y-axis. Then work is done as input which is equal to the product of the quantity of the resultant torque developed in the Y-axis (which is the vector sum of the applied torque and the suo moto torque developed in the Y-axis) and the angular rotation of the body in the same axis. That is, resultant torque x angular rotation. The two torques, one in the Y-axis, and the other in the Z-axis developed suo moto, have no anti-torque at all. And both of them can be called as "Free Torques." Here X, Y, and Z axes are mutually perpendicular or separated in space by 90 degrees. But it is against the Newton's third law of motion. In other words, Newton's third law of motion cannot be generalized to the gyroscopic area. This is a new finding or invention which has very high scientific relevance as it is absolutely true.

A normal system depicting the torque and the connected anti-torque is developed. A fly wheel rotating in the horizontal plane in the anticlockwise direction is made in model (I).  The fly wheel is made to rotate by two 12 volt D.C. motors. The motors rotate in the vertical plane. This rotation in vertical plane is converted to rotation of the fly wheel in the horizontal plane through the bevel gears shown. But the torque in fly wheel in the horizontal plane has its anti-torque in the horizontal plane which is experienced in the floating vessel carrying the fly wheel in the opposite direction. This makes the vessel which is floating to rotate in the opposite direction (clockwise) proving the torque and anti-torque theory which is developed from the Newton’s third law of motion. This is a natural phenomenon which we always experience.  

 

For demonstrating the existence of the "Free Torques", a working model (II) of a gyroscopic system has been developed. The vessel floating in water carries a tripod rigidly fixed on it. On the top of the tripod, a circular platform is pivoted using a thrust bearing so that it is free to rotate in the horizontal plane. On this platform two identical gyroscopes are fixed facing in opposite directions. The wheels in the gyroscope are rotated (spun) in X-axis at a high speed in the order of 10,000 R.P.M. When the two wheels are in the top position, the gravitational force in the rotating wheels creates a torque in the Y-axis. This is resisted by a "Free Torque" developed suo moto in the same Y-axis. But due to the "Free Torque" consequently developed in the Z-axis causes the platform to rotate in the Z-axis or in the horizontal plane in anticlockwise direction. This Z-axis rotation in the horizontal plane does work (energy) which is the product of the "Free Torque" in the Z-axis and its angular rotation. But according to the law of conservation of energy there cannot be an energy output without an energy input. It is further observed that the Y-axis resultant torque of the gyroscope has made it to rotate slowly in the direction of the applied torque which is also work or energy input that is equal to the product of Y-axis resultant torque (which is the vector sum of the applied torque in the Y-axis and suo moto torque developed in the same axis which is in the opposite direction) and the angular rotation caused in the same Y-axis.

               

The surprising part of the system is that the floating vessel in model (II) never rotates in the opposite direction according to Newton's third Law. On the other hand, it rotates along with the circular platform in the anticlockwise direction itself at a lower speed. It may be due to the friction offered by the thrust bearing and its brushing effect. In all normal conditions the floating vessel should rotate in the opposite direction [clockwise direction as in model (I)]. But the vessel is rotating in the anticlockwise direction at a lower speed. It clearly shows that the Z- axis torque and rotation there by caused have no anti-torque at all in a gyroscopic system. On observation, it is found as a different world above the Newton's third law of motion. This "Free Torque" in the Z-axis in the gyroscope can be utilized in the practical field for saving a good quantity of energy wasted by anti-torque. If more research and development work are done, it can be used in the Helicopter to eliminate the tail end rotor saving a good quantity of energy. Also, it can be effectively employed in the man made satellites/space ships to rotate them in all the three axes of X, Y and Z whenever required.

It is true that the spinning wheel when it moves in the Y-axis upwards after crossing the lowest point in model (II), Z- axis torque will reverse and the platform will rotate in the opposite direction then. There are techniques to make it to rotate unidirectionally like a reciprocating motion converted to unidirectional rotation in a crank shaft in automobiles.  All the water vehicles, air vehicles and even rockets waste a large quantity of energy in the reacting bodies, which are very light weight, during its motion. The author has the firm conviction that the future world will develop vehicles without reacting energy loss using 'Free force' (action without reaction). His rigorous research in the past few years made him to find out a way to invent a new world of "Free Torque."

This conclusion is flagrantly in contradiction

From: uitterdijk <sjaakenlutske@hetnet.nl> Subject: Religious science Dear members Nobel Committee Physics, Would you be so kind to pay attention to the following consideration? One of the postulates in physics sounds: all physical laws are the same in any inertial system. A consequence of this postulate is that the time measurement of (atomic) clocks, moving with constant speed, are not influenced by such a speed. This conclusion is clearly in contradiction with the outcome of the Special Theory of Relativity (STR).  Another consequence of this postulate is that, given the physical laws of Maxwell, the velocity of light in vacuum must be c,explicitly and only with respect to its inertial source.  This conclusion is flagrantly in contradiction with one of the hypotheses on which the STR is based. The past decade I have shown thousands of physicists this fundamental proof of the invalidity of the STR. Those physicists, inclusive Nobel laureates, who tried to contest this evidence, used the most weird and/or non-scientific counter arguments. They give me the impression that they believe in the STR like religious people believe in the Koran/Bible.  Publication of my article in magazines/arXiv, designated for this purpose, is impossible. To my opinion due to this religion like believe in the STR. As a result you will find my article at http://vixra.org/abs/1611.0111  The Principle of Absolute Relativity. The described attitude of physicists is of course fatal for physical science, leading to its lowest possible level: science fiction. I’m looking forward to your opinion about the phenomenon presented above. Kind regards, Sjaak Uitterdijk                                                                                  The Netherlands FYI: This e-mail has been received too by 2000 (out of a list of 8000) physicists as blind copy. They are members of the following universities: All in the Netherlands and Belgium, ETH Zürich, Oxford, Cambridge, Imperial College, University College London, Berkeley, Harvard, MIT, Stanford and Cornell. Besides that: Princeton IAS.

before we will start our Scientific Deal

From: sell info <sellingproinfo@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 1:32 AM

Subject: Dark Matter — The Truth is .....

Greeting 
-----------------


Fill these two spaces ( 01 , 02 ) to get the truth of dark matter. 

 The dark matter is the total of Elementary particles masses ..........01.............  that do not contain any ...........02............

I think i have the truth of the dark matter and the dark enrgy

Or,  Rather

I have some good informations that will helps you to get the truth of dark matter and the dark enrgy


A little Free Informations

The key ​that you need to solve the puzzle​ of (gravity,  Collecting the four powers,​ dark matter and dark energy​ , and ....)​​


1/  You need to know the meaning of the stable and the meaning of the ​repository  in order to know 
the truth of dark matter and dark energy​ and the truth  of gravity, and ....


2/ everything is stable and repository​ ( any thing in this Existence is stable and repository ..)


3/​ Repetition and pluralism in anything mean demise, Because the repeated thing is a repository it's not stable


4/ The beginning of anything is an absolute stable force AND The end of anything is an absolute stable form (activity,action)

5/ The stable power does not settle in a real single repository format AND the stable formt (activity , action) does not settle in a  real single repository power 

6/ We can't collect (add up) the powers or the masses or any of the real things that contain both of ( the power and mass  )

We only can collect  all of absolute beginnings or absolute endings,(we only can collect  the things's roots of any essence )

I mean, we can collect some  or  all the absolute powers that don't contain actions ( forms, activity )
Or  we can collect some or all  the absolute forms (activity , actions), that don't contain power



7/ We can't collect the gravity with the  other three forces ( Electromagnetic ,Weak power,Strong strength), because gravity is a stable force ( it's not repository ) that does not contain any mass activation

8/ The theory of everything will not explain everything, It will only explain the scientific truth of the finals (the scientific truths of the absolute end of events that do not contain anyscientificical force that has a single real event) (one real stable event and many non-real event forces that what the everything theory will get )



More professional information for sale

09/ ........................... 
10/ ...........................
11/ ...........................
12/ ...........................
13/ ............................

     ...........  and more

I am an old fashioned man, for that  I used  a simple and direct communication method

So,  what can you say in this case ?

I am waiting fro your response as soon as you understand my message
Inform I'm just an independent science man
I do not follow any academic institution or any political orientation
So be free , to enjoy with our clean realtion

Finally ..

would you ask any quiestion
 that you need before we will start our Scientific Deal


Accept my greetings and gratitude


.Greeting 
-----------------


Fill these two spaces ( 01 , 02 ) to get the truth of dark matter. 

 The dark matter is the total of Elementary particles masses ..........01.............  that do not contain any ...........02............

I think i have the truth of the dark matter and the dark enrgy

Or,  Rather

I have some good informations that will helps you to get the truth of dark matter and the dark enrgy


A little Free Informations

The key ​that you need to solve the puzzle​ of (gravity,  Collecting the four powers,​ dark matter and dark energy​ , and ....)​​


1/  You need to know the meaning of the stable and the meaning of the ​repository  in order to know 
the truth of dark matter and dark energy​ and the truth  of gravity, and ....


2/ everything is stable and repository​ ( any thing in this Existence is stable and repository ..)


3/​ Repetition and pluralism in anything mean demise, Because the repeated thing is a repository it's not stable


4/ The beginning of anything is an absolute stable force AND The end of anything is an absolute stable form (activity,action)

5/ The stable power does not settle in a real single repository format AND the stable formt (activity , action) does not settle in a  real single repository power 

6/ We can't collect (add up) the powers or the masses or any of the real things that contain both of ( the power and mass  )

We only can collect  all of absolute beginnings or absolute endings,(we only can collect  the things's roots of any essence )

I mean, we can collect some  or  all the absolute powers that don't contain actions ( forms, activity )
Or  we can collect some or all  the absolute forms (activity , actions), that don't contain power



7/ We can't collect the gravity with the  other three forces ( Electromagnetic ,Weak power,Strong strength), because gravity is a stable force ( it's not repository ) that does not contain any mass activation

8/ The theory of everything will not explain everything, It will only explain the scientific truth of the finals (the scientific truths of the absolute end of events that do not contain any scientificical force that has a single real event) (one real stable event and many non-real event forces that what the everything theory will get )



More professional information for sale

09/ ........................... 
10/ ...........................
11/ ...........................
12/ ...........................
13/ ............................

     ...........  and more

I am an old fashioned man, for that  I used  a simple and direct communication method

So,  what can you say in this case ?

I am waiting fro your response as soon as you understand my message
Inform I'm just an independent science man
I do not follow any academic institution or any political orientation
So be free , to enjoy with our clean realtion

Finally ..

would you ask any quiestion
 that you need before we will start our Scientific Deal


Accept my greetings and gratitude