The Tom Bearden



From: "Tom Bearden"
To: ***********
Subj:  Comments on Dark Matter paper
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 12:19:35 -0500


Got a chuckle out of the AHHHHHH!

I strongly suspect that the demonstrated (e.g., Bohren experiment) negentropic reorganization of the vacuum, that occurs because of all the dipoles in those big violent masses out there in astronomy land, also does the negative gravity bit.  Here's why:

The reorganization is actually a Whittaker bi-wave set in every case.  So there are two flows of energy that are organized.  Look at each wavepair. The ordinary, garden-variety EM wave is outgoing, pouring out of that dipole in all directions at the speed of light.  That is then the "ordinary energy" change to the energy density of vacuum, so that will give us the curvature of spacetime for positive gravity.  Since all the waves in ensemble constitute the out-going potential being constituted at the speed of light, then the potential (energy density at a point in space) falls off inversely as the distance.  This means that the effect is strongest back toward the dipoles in the masses themselves.  Hence we get the ordinary gravity effect. It's the mass-energy that makes the gravity anyway, not "mass" per se (which still is not defined in physics!).

Okay, that gets the missing gravity, or certainly a major part of it.

But we still have that other wave in the pair, and it is INCOMING.  It's also in the complex plane, since it's a phase conjugate.

Well, in Minkowski space we model time in the complex plane.  So this incoming wave is a structural wave INSIDE TIME.  In short, it's a reorganization of the time domain, not the 3-space domain (which was reorganized by the other wave).

So INCOMING to the dipole is a whole surrounding set of these incoming complex domain waves.  Taken all together, they comprise an incoming "time potential".  And the strength of this t-potential is again inversely proportional to the 3-space distance from the dipole.

So clustering around the masses is this time-potential (which of course is also negentropically reorganized).

Well, here's the magic bullet.  Rigorously, in Minkowski space, in its complex plane, we use ( -ict).

So there is a big fat minus sign there, which MULTIPLIES this t-potential, since it's sitting in that "t" in -ict.

So this t-potential actually is a (-t) potential, insofar as the Minkowski model is concerned, and insofar as the modeling of curvature of spacetime is concerned.

Voila!  It is well-known that all potentials are "gravitational" because of their energy.  However, now we have a negative potential in that t-potential, with respect to its "making gravity".  (You can curve spacetime either with 3-spatial energy density or with t-energy density).

The end result is that this second part of the negentropic reorganization MAKES ANTIGRAVITY, concentrated around those dipole/mass clusters in those astronomy entities.

And there is the missing antigravity effect.  They missed it because they completely ignore the mechanism that generates the flow through time of a mass or charge, and therefore missed such things as the structure of time and the intense compression of spatial energy that time actually represents, the time-potential, time-energy, and the use of time-energy and time-potentials to curve spacetime, rather than 3-spatial energy which they are familiar with.

The reason I did not include this was that as yet I haven't struggled with it enough to smoothly express it, much less "elegantly".  But I'm pretty certain that is precisely what is giving the antigravity effect.

Anyway, JNE is going to publish the paper proposing the dark energy solution to the missing gravity problem.

Then in the future I'll have to try to work up a paper proposing that the "time energy" effect accompanying the dark energy effect also is the cause of the missing antigravity effect.

The problem is that in astrophysics I'm a total novice.  I don't think watching Star Trek qualifies one for astrophysics!  So because of my personal limitations, all I can do is "root up" the fundamental idea and propose it, and then see if any of the proper theorists are interested or if they do something with it.  The problem there is that they still have not properly tangled with the mechanism that generates the flow of time (I uncovered that in 1972 while in grad school at Georgia Tech, and absolutely no one was interested in it!).

But if all this holds, it is interesting indeed that Heaviside prior to 1900 had uncovered the basis for both the missing gravity and the missing antigravity.  And the basis for free energy as well.  Yet it was only in 1957 or so that the broken symmetry of the dipole in the vacuum energy flux was clearly established.  During the intervening 43 years, no one has gone back and restored the dark energy Heaviside flow component that Lorentz arbitrarily and erroneously discarded.  Indeed, the Heaviside dark energy component presented a giant dilemma.  Faced with the anathema of such gigantic energy pouring out of the terminals of every battery and generator, Lorentz was totally bumfuzzled (as was anyone else of the few dozen or so electrodynamicists at the time who even considered it).  Nothing at all could be found anywhere in science at the time to explain all that Heaviside component which missed the circuit -- and therefore "did its thing" by acting upon spacetime itself.  But considering just powering the external circuit, the Heaviside nonintercepted, nondiverged (though massive!) energy flow seemed to have "no physical significance" (Lorentz's term) at all.  So Lorentz threw the terribly bothersome thing out, avoiding the problem rather than solving it, since there was not even an approach anywhere evidenced that might solve it).

However, I have to point out one very, very difficult thing to grasp, and something I'm still working on.  Time-energy curvatures of spacetime can produce effects quite different from localized (spatial) effects.  Think of it this way.  At a single point in time, every part of the observable universe "exists" simultaneously in that same identical point.  Time is a kind of "multiply connected space" in that respect, and can act much like a quantum potential.  Indeed, eventually the QP may actually be reduced to a time-energy effect, since "distance' in 3-space is meaningless to a multiply connected space (which of course is the entire notion in the QP).

The end result is that apparently one can build a case for the antigravity and the gravity effects cancelling one another at the dipole itself. However, the t-potential or antigravity effect may be minutely expressed everywhere else, because of the "multiply connected space" aspects of time and thus of time-energy.  This is action at a distance with a vengeance. So the negative gravity effect would only become more and more apparent to an observer (or to the instruments), as he looked farther and farther away.

At this point, of course, the average physicist will conclude that any such notion is authored by an utter idiot!  And who knows, he may yet be correct! Anyway, right or wrong, it's the best I've been able to come up with, but is still rough and bleeding from the slaughter of common sense.  Just yet, I haven't figured out how to even write that in paper and not be immediately labeled as a total lunatic.

Hope things go well with you,

Cheers, Tom

-----Original Message----- 
From:     Steve ******* 
Sent:     Thursday, April 20, 2000 7:29 AM

Interesting paper but it seems you left something out. What about the weaker than gravity, repulsion force. It seems to be much much weaker than gravity but has observed to have a sharp curve when large bodies are in close proximity. The moon over the many eons should have drifted into Earth. It's not going fast enough to maintain its orbit based on existing known calculations. Gee, sounds a lot like the missing info on current EM theory. Am I sounding like Tom Bearden? Oh my god, AHHHHHHH!!!! ;-)