Author Archives: Paul
High-velocity outflows from the GC, or a misinterpretation?
Radio emission map made with the 64 meter Parkes Radio Telescope
A group of astronomers has recently reported radio telescope data which they claim is evidence of an immense high velocity outflow or “geyser” of magnetized plasma from the center of the Milky Way whose origin they attribute to starburst activity in the Galaxy’s central region. They report their results in the Jan. 2 issue of Nature magazine. Also see the following news articles:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/01/130102140349.htm
https://www.csiro.au/Portals/Media/Our-Galaxys-geysers-are-towers-of-power.aspx
I have received several emails from people inquiring if this may be evidence of a past Galactic core outburst similar to that discussed in a previous posting on the Fermi bubbles. I believe that this is not evidence of a Galactic core outflow. Neither do I believe that it is evidence of a geyser-like starburst outflow from the center of the Milky Way as the authors of the Nature paper claim. In fact, believe that this emission has nothing to do with the Galactic center.
For more on this story visit the Starburst Superwave Forum
Will a superwave arrive around July 2013 and cause a widespread catastrophe?
Artist's depiction of the G2 cloud being dispersed and swallowed during its close approach to Sagittarius A*
For a decade now astronomers have been tracking the progress of a dense gas cloud called G2 which now is rapidly approaching the Galactic center on a very eccentric elliptical orbit (eccentricity ~ 0.95) and is estimated to reach pericenter (the point of closest approach) around the beginning of July 2013. Tidal forces have already been observed to stretch the cloud and these forces will become increasingly strong over the next 9 months as the cloud approaches orbit pericenter at which point it is thought that they will be strong enough to completely rip the cloud apart. At this point the dispersed cloud is expected to be gravitationally drawn into the Galactic core with the consequent release of a large amount of energy in the form of cosmic rays and gamma ray emission.
I have been asked by several people whether the cloud’s consumption on this 2013 date might produce a Galactic superwave which would be reaching our solar system on that same date (due to the ability of the cosmic rays to travel straight toward us at close to the speed of light) and produce a major solar system cataclysm; e.g. see the forum comment by psychiceyes. Indeed, due to the ending of the Mayan calendar cycle on December 21, 2012, there are many who expect an end of world scenario or consciousness transition event. In fact, some groups have built shelters in the heart of Australia and South Africa with this expectation in mind.
To read more on this go to the Superwave Forum.
Release of Project Montgolfier Report on T. T. Brown's 1955 - 1956 Electrogravitic Experiments
Project Montgolfier electrokinetic disc test flight
In 1955 and 1956 Townsend Brown made two trips to Paris where he conducted tests of his electrokinetic apparatus and electrogravitic vacuum chamber tests in collaboration with the French aeronautical company Société National de Construction Aeronautiques du Sud Ouest (S.N.C.A.S.O.). He was invited there by Jacques Cornillon, the company’s U.S. technical representative. Details of the Project Montgolfier experiments remained a closely guarded secret for many years until Jacques Cornillon courageously decided to make them public prior to his death in July 2008.
An overview of the Project Montgolfier material and links for downloading the documents may be found posted on the Starburst Foundation Electrogravitics Forum at: https://starburstfound.org/electrograviticsblog/?p=49.
Solar Storm Warning!!
May 9, 2012 Warning
NASA today warned that the Sun has erupted with a very large sunspot complex that has produced an M1.4 solar flare and launched a barrage of solar cosmic ray particles and a coronal mass ejection that are headed our way.
https://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47339655/ns/technology_and_science-space/#.T6rLiUZ_Xm8
https://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/5205/biggest-solar-storm-2005-pummels-earth
Close up of coronal loops over a solar flare made with the TRACE spacecraft in 2005 (courtesy of NASA/TRACE)
Are we in Danger from a Local Interstellar Cloud Incursion?
The Local Interstellar Cloud
The solar system is currently embedded in the Local Interstellar Cloud, or Local Fluff as it is sometimes called, a gas cloud about 30 light years wide and travelling past us at 29 km per second. At this speed we should be going through it for the next 300,000 years. It has been suggested that this cloud may contain cloudlets having gas densities hundreds of times higher than the Local Interstellar Cloud average. How far away they may lie from the solar system or when they will impact us remains open to speculation. But, one might ask how likely it is that the solar system’s movement through such a high density region will affect the Sun and Earth, whether it will impact us in a way similar to how a superwave has done in the past? First, we may surmise that we are not dealing with any kind of immediate threat. If such a cloudlet were as close as 1 to 2 light years from us, at this speed of passage it would take 10,000 to 20,000 years before it reached us. We should, then, be more concerned with the impending arrival of a galactic superwave which with a very great likelihood could arrive in the next few centuries.
However, suppose we assume for the moment that there is an impending threat from such a cloudlet incursion. Would the solar and climatic effects be like that of a superwave? Well we can do some calculations to find out. Given that the Local Fluff has a density of ~0.1 hydrogen atoms/cm3. The hypothesized cloudlet, which could have a density hundreds of times greater, would then have a density of say around 20 to 50 hydrogen atoms per cubic centimeter. This would equal a cloud density of around 3 to 8 X 10-23grams/cm3. An interstellar cloud incursion of this sort would have a significant climatic effect and a significant solar effect. But the most dangerous phase would likely last for several years, rather than for centuries or millennia as is often the case for the effects from a superwave.
More on this is posted on the Starburst Superwave Forum:
Resurrection of the Hubble-Jeans Galaxy Formation Theory
Astronomer Edwin Hubble
A review of the most recent data on galaxy evolution shows that the subquantum kinetics continuous creation theory of galaxy formation is correct. That galaxies progressively grow in size and mass, proceeding from dwarf elliptical to S0 to mature spiral and finally to giant elliptical. The data also call for the reinstatement of the galaxy evolution theory which Edwin Hubble and Sir James Jeans proposed in the early 20th century. It indicates that Hubble's "tuning fork" diagram of galaxy evolution was largely correct with one exception. The elliptical galaxies on the left should be considered dwarf spheroidals and dwarf ellipticals while the giant elliptical category should be placed in a new branch to the right of the spirals, with both spiral category branches evolving into the giant elliptical category.
Hubble's turning fork diagram of galaxy evolution
Hubble's classification scheme is used even today. Even so, astronomer's today have largely rejected Hubble's evolution theory in favor of galaxy merger theories. In the ebook fourth edition of Subquantum Kinetics, Paul LaViolette discusses recent evidence which supports the subquantum kinetics galaxy evolution model, as well as the Hubble-Jeans evolution model and shows that the current galaxy merger theory is seriously problematic, as is the big bang theory.
News reports on solar energy
Solar Energy Findings
• Oregon Journal, June 16, 1977
• Schenectady Gazette, July 23, 1977
• Solar Energy Intelligence Report, June 20, 1977
• Ekonomikos (Greek newspaper), October 13, 1977
• Eleftherotypia (Greek newspaper), September 21, 1977
• Eleftheros Kosmos (Greek newspaper), October 2, 1977
• Kathimerini (Greek newspaper), October 25, 1977
• Ta Nea (Greek newspaper), September 27, 1977
• Politika Themata (Greek magazine), September 17, 1977
• Lecture at the Evgenidion Planetarium, Athens, Sept. 14, 1977
P. LaViolette being Interviewed by ERT Television, Athens, Sept., 1977
Evidence for a solar cause to the Pleistocene mass extinction
For Immediate Release (Science)
June 3, 2011
The Starburst Foundation
plaviolette@starburstfound.org
Evidence that the Pleistocene mass extinction
may have had a solar cause
Close to the end of the last ice age there was a sudden disappearance of many mammalian species which some paleontologists say was the most severe since the disappearance of the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. In North America 95 percent of the megafauna became extinct, these being predominantly mammals having body weights greater than 25 to 50 kilograms. But even small animals were affected, as in the disappearance of 10 genera of birds. Although North America was most affected, it had a severe impact also in Europe, Siberia, and South America.
The cause of the extinction has long remained a mystery. Theories that have been put forth have ranged from overkill by North American paleolithic hunters to the impact of a large comet or swarm of meteors. But all have been shown to have serious flaws. Now, Starburst Foundation researcher Dr. Paul LaViolette has found evidence that this mysterious die-off may have had a solar flare cause. In his paper published this week in the journal Radiocarbon, LaViolette concludes that a super sized solar proton event (SPE) impacted the earth about 12,900 years ago (12,837± 10 calendar years BP).* He notes that this date roughly coincides with that of the Rancholabrean termination, a time boundary beyond which the numbers of extinct megafaunal remains are found to sharply decline. Solar proton events, blasts of energetic solar cosmic ray particles that are shot out with the eruption of a solar flare, can arrive with little advance notice, traversing the 93 million mile distance from the Sun to the Earth in a matter of hours. They are usually followed some days later by a slower moving solar wind plasma shock called a coronal mass ejection. They have been observed to occur from time to time in past decades, but none in modern times have been strong enough to pose a serious ground-level radiation hazard.
* LaViolette, P. A., Evidence for a solar flare cause of the Pleistocene mass extinction, Radiocarbon 53(2), 2011, pp. 303-323.
Free download of a preprint of this paper: starburstfound.org/downloads/superwave/SPE.html
Experiment to test whether inertial mass can be artificially altered
Posted May 26, 2011
by Paul LaViolette
The subquantum kinetics physics theory predicts that the inertial mass of a body can be changed by altering either its electric or gravitational potential. High negative voltage potentials or positive G potentials (gravity hills) are predicted to reduce inertial mass, while high positive voltage potentials or negative G potentials (gravity wells) are predicted to increase inertial mass. At present, a considerable amount of theoretical work needs to be done to determine how large a voltage potential would be needed to produce the predicted effect. Nevertheless, even without a specific quantitative prediction, we felt that if an effect was seen, this would provide strong support for the subquantum kinetics paradigm since such mass altering effects are not predicted by standard physics theory. For some time we have been interested to search for such an effect; for example, see Project No. 16 of the Starburst Projects List.
On Saturday May 21, 2011 Starburst Foundation researcher Paul LaViolette conducted this experiment in the New York laboratory of Alexi Guy Obolensky, with Mr. Obolensky and his assistant John being directly involved in the measurement process. Two mechanical pocket watches were used to check for any sign of inertial mass variation. These pocket watches use a torsion pendulum for their timing, that is, a wheel having a mass at its rim and a spring applying torque. Any change in the mass of the wheel would reflect as a change in the ticking rate of the watch. Under normal conditions, the two watches were found to deviate in their timing by less than 0.1 seconds over a 15 minute period, hence by less than one part in 104. One watch was placed within a metallic sphere which was charged to -200 kilovolts for a period of 15 minutes. The other watch was kept some distance from the sphere and was used as a time reference. The watches were started simultaneously, the one was placed within its sphere, the sphere energized and after 15 minutes discharged once again, and then the two watches were finally brought together and simultaneously stopped.
The outcome of the experiment was that no time difference was seen between the two watches. Hence if any inertial mass change was in fact induced during the 15 minute test period, it would have had to be less than one part in 104. The experiment was run once with the target watch grounded to its metal sphere by a wire inside the sphere and once with the watch electrically isolated from its enclosing sphere. Also a third trial was performed in which the sphere was repeatedly charged and then completely discharged 15 times per second during the 15 minute test period. Again, even in this pulsed mode, no evidence of a change of inertial mass.
Erwin Saxl in 1964 claimed to have observed that the period of a torsion pendulum had changed by 0.4 to 0.7% when energized to +5000 V or -5000 V. Liu et al. (1998) later checked Saxl's results energizing a torsion pendulum to ±2000 volts. They saw no period change from the application of the voltage potential indicating that if there had been any change of inertial mass it would have had to be less than one part per billion. Our findings are consistent with those of Liu et al. Although our time measurement resolution was far less, we did extend this measurement to voltages 100 fold greater than used by Liu et al.
Mikhailov (1999) measured the oscillation period of an electron plasma confined within an electrically charged sphere and found evidence that the electron's inertial mass had varied by ±0.3% when the sphere was charged respectively to ±3000 volts. LaViolette had reasoned that if this mass change effect was due to an electrogravitic inertial mass change effect of the sort predicted by subquantum kinetics, then a similar inertial mass change should be observed for neutral matter as well. Hence the incentive to conduct the stop watch experiment. The null result of this watch experiment suggests that the phenomenon observed by Mikhailov may be due to another effect. For example, Assis (1993) attributes the electron inertial mass variation observed by Mikhailov to an effect predicted by Weber's theory of electromagnetism.
E. Saxl Nature 203 (1964):136-139.
Y. Liu, et al. Physics Letters A 244 (1998):1-3.
V. F. Mikhailov Ann. Fonde. Louis de Broglie 24 (1999):161-169.
A. K. T. Assis J. Phys. Soc. Japan 62 (1993):1418-1422.
Letter to Physics Today magazine regarding subquantum kinetics galaxy redshift prediction
Letter to the editor sent to Physics Today magazine on May 22, 1990
Will the Hubble Telescope Detect a Limit to Galaxy Redshifts?
May 22, 1990
Paul A. LaViolette, Ph.D.
The Starburst Foundation
2615 S.E. 111th Ave., #10
Portland, Oregon 97266
With the launching of the Hubble Space Telescope astronomers are anxiously waiting to see what will be revealed to lie at the "edge" of the universe. The big bang theory predicts that few galaxies should be observed with redshifts much greater than 4, simply because there is not enough time for them to form. This assumes an age for the big bang universe of 9.4 billion years, based on the findings of Reid et al.(1) and Tully(2) which suggest Ho = 100 km/sec/Mpc. Galaxy formation models require at least 750 million years to form light-emitting galaxies, and according to the big bang cosmology, galaxies with z > 4 would necessarily be younger than this. If there is indeed a cut-off at around this value, the Hubble Telescope would be able to see it. The telescope should be able to detect light emitting objects with redshifts even as high as 30, if such exist. So observations with the Space Telescope could provide a crucial test of the validity of the big bang theory.
However, I predict that contrary to expectations, galaxies will be found which will have redshifts greater than 4 and, in fact, that they will be found in great numbers. This prediction arises from a quantum theory that projects a cosmology quite different from that of the big bang theory. This subquantum kinetics(3) cosmology predicts a static universe of unlimited size in which matter arises through a process of continuous creation, creation rates being highest in the vicinity of existing matter. The cosmology also predicts the existence of a tired-light cosmological redshift for photons travelling through intergalactic space. As was demonstrated in 1986,(4) this tired-light prediction fits observational data better than the expanding universe Doppler shift hypothesis, on four different cosmology tests.
Subquantum kinetics suggests that galaxies should be present in space at very high redshifts, much higher than is predicted by the big bang theory. If this theory is correct, then the expected cutoff in galaxy redshifts should not be observed. I expect that the highest observable galaxy redshift will possibly be in the vicinity of z = 30 and will be observer limited (determined by the light gathering power of the Hubble Telescope, rather than by cosmological factors). If such a discovery is made, it will probably be one of the most perplexing findings of the Hubble mission. Perhaps within the next year we will have an answer as to which cosmology is correct.
References
1. Reid, M. J., et al., Ap.J. 330, 809 (1988).
2. Tully, R. B., Nature 334, 209 (1988).
3. P. A. LaViolette, Intl. J. General Systems, 11, 281, 295, 329 (1985).
4. P. A. LaViolette, Ap.J. 301, 544 (1986).
Cover letter sent with submitted letter:
Cover letter of letter submission received by Physics Today on May 29, 1990
Response received from Physics Today saying they would not publish the letter:
September 1990 letter from Physics Today rejecting publication of the letter
.
During the 21 years elapsing since this prediction was mailed to Physics Today, many galaxies have been discovered with redshift greater than z = 4.
Here is a recent example of a z = 10 candidate announced January 27, 2011:
https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v469/n7331/full/nature09717.html
Hubble Ultra Deep Field 09. Box shows z = 10 candidate.
Bottom line:
Over the years another subquantum kinetics prediction will have been vindicated.
