General Relativity and Gravitation
"A surprising fact was noted, that the first variety of ozone .... always
rose in the air. It cannot be lighter, because the number of Arnoo in
both varieties of ozone are the same, i.e. 435."
Besant & Leadbeater [1]
Fig. 1 Arnoo, showing chirality. Fig. 2 Arnoo lined up by electric current.
Introduction
The above quotation, plus Besant & Leadbeater's [1] observation of Arnoo lining-up (see Fig. 2 above) are the basis for an experimental prediction given below in the Gravity section.
The high accuracy of the equality of inertial mass and gravitational mass for all materials, is a basis either for General Relativity (via Mach's Principle) or for supposing that all forms of matter (including associated binding energies) are composed of identical ultimate particles. The latter view is suggested here, with the universal ultimate particle (mass quantum) as the Arnoo (not the Arnoo of 3-D but the ultimate Arnoo in 10-D).
A test for Einstein's General Theory of Relativity is that the deflection of a starlight beam passing close to the sun is about twice that calculated from just assuming the photon's mass and velocity (c) passing near the sun. But if the "hidden matter" of the Universe is that in higher dimensions [4], which still are subject to gravity, the sun may be more massive than expected (having extra "hidden" mass) and may thus deflect the light beam more than predicted by Newton's gravity equation. It was found experimentally
that the deflection of a light beam is about double the Newton prediction. This is explained in the Gravity section (later below). About 95% of mass in the Universe is hidden mass possibly suggesting an equipartition of mass to each useable dimension, 2-D to 10-D, which is 9 dimensions (discounting 1-D space).
General Relativity depends partly on the Principle of Equivalence, which is explained in many textbooks. It asserts that there is no experimental way of distinguishing any difference between acceleration due to gravity and acceleration due to being inside an accelerating vehicle. But in a vehicle it is a matter of common observation that fast acceleration causes one to be pressed into one's seat, but free-falling in a helicopter from which the blades have broken off would be quite different and there would be no sensation of being pressed by any part of the cabin (one could float about freely and this effect is used to train astronauts by diving in an aircraft).
A simple quantitative experiment would be to place a cube made of soft spongy plastic in the cabin of a rocket-ship in free space (away from any gravity field) and it would be pressed flat against the floor if the rocket motors were started.
But if the rocket-ship were falling towards a planet (e.g. Jupiter) without any motors firing, the sponge cube would be free to drift about in the cabin and would not be pressed flat against the floor or ceiling by the gravitational acceleration.
So gravitational acceleration is fundamentally different from being in an accelerating vehicle
:
gravity acts on every atom throughout the body independently, but vehicular acceleration acts only on those molecules in direct contact with the vehicle and the force is then transferred purely mechanically to other parts of the body and the result is compression of the body.
If the above paragraph is not convincing, please see Appendix 1 for an alternative model.
So, with these simple and obvious examples, it is very surprising that so many textbooks assert that there is no observable difference between these two types of acceleration
!
The difference has been studiously ignored and the Principle of Equivalence of acceleration is clearly wrong.
The equivalence of accelerations is required for General Relativity because it can easily be shown that a clock runs slower if accelerated and the proof is trivially easy for an accelerating vehicle, but is not obvious for acceleration by a gravitational field. If a clock runs slower in a gravity field, this leads to the notion of "space-time" distortions required for general relativity. But as with Special Relativity, the results derived from the theory of General Relativity can be obtained without assuming the Principle of Equivalence and General Relativity is not required.
Gravity
The Arnoo are described as being cardioid in shape (Fig. 1 above), with an inrush of a force from 4-D space into the top of the "positive" type of Arnoo (source), and an outrush of force from 3-D space back to 4-D space, from the "negative" type of Arnoo, which acts like a hole in space (sink). If smaller Arnoo from the higher dimensions (call these gravitons) are pulled into the top and ejected from the point, this would propel the Arnoo towards the source of the gravitons. The mass of the Earth will have large numbers of Arnoo in it and in its vicinity, so that there would be a tendency for physical (3-D) level Arnoo in the Earth's atmosphere to move in the direction of the centre of the Earth. All Arnoo are described as spinning and moving chaotically and so an Arnoo will sometimes be pointing towards and sometimes away from the Earth. When its top (Fig. 1) is pointing towards the Earth, the Arnoo will move towards the Earth
;
when its top is pointing away from the Earth it will move away, but because more gravitons are nearer the Earth than further away from it, there will be a (small) net movement of Arnoo towards the Earth (more graviton throughput per second), which explains gravity.
As mentioned earlier, one observer [2] reports that the Arnoo is actually the top of a carrot-like structure and the point of the "carrot" is attached to the centre of the Earth. Since B&L do not mention this "carrot", and since they always very precisely confine their observation to the particular level of interest (which is the 3-D world, if looking at physical 3-D Arnoo), they do not digress to describe any 4-D associated structure, but they do mention [1] that the physical 3-D Arnoo is a point of entry (positive type) or exit (negative type) (see Fig. 1) of an energy from or to the next higher dimension (4-D). This suggests that the Arnoo is a vortex. Using the Hermetic adage, "As above, so below", it may be comparable with a waterspout or tornado. It could draw in Arnoo of higher dimensions. If higher-dimensional Arnoo (gravitons) are drawn into the top of a 3-D Arnoo while it is facing downwards towards the Earth, this could propel that Arnoo towards the Earth; these gravitons could then be passed down the "carrot" structure which exists in 4-D, back to the centre of the Earth, and thus re-cycled
;
the return process, being in 4-D, is not in any direction in the 3-D world. This may give an insight into gravity. A relevant paper on vortexes is available [3].
Reducing Gravity
The above discussion suggests that a way to reduce the gravity acting on a material could be to pass a vertically oriented electric current through it, or place it in a vertical electric field, to line-up its Arnoo as in Fig. 2 above, which would orient the Arnoo's point toward the Earth. Experiments to study this are in progress. See also Appendix 2 below.
Deflection of a starlight beam by gravity
This is the classic experiment which is cited as proof of Einstein's General Relativity theory.
Gravity in 3 dimensions, like the electrostatic force, follows an inverse square law with distance. Unlike electrostatic and electromagnetic forces, gravity propagates through the higher dimensions. If gravity propagates outwards from a sphere like the Earth, the amount of propagation passing through unit area of the sphere's surface falls off with the square of the sphere's radius, because the area of a sphere is proportional to its radius squared. This explains why gravity falls off with the square of the radial distance.
But for the 4 dimensional analogue of a sphere, the fall-off is proportional to the
cube
of the radial distance. For higher dimensional sphere analogues, the fall off is proportional to (dimension)
(n-1)
where n is the dimension.
Thus, on the above model the total gravitational effect of the sun will be more than that calculated from assuming it to be only a 3-D object, and will include extra gravitational terms up to the 10
th
dimension. Thus a light beam will be deflected more than calculated from assuming the sun is just a 3-D object. This is explained further, below.
To keep the figures simple, define a unit of distance such that the radius of the sun is 2 such units of distance. Then using Newton's Law of Gravity
:
(
NOTE:
oc
means "proportional to")
At the sun's periphery
:
Force
oc
1/d
2
oc
1/2
2
oc
1/4 (for ordinary 3-D matter).
And the gravity force from the "hidden matter" (4-D matter) in the sun, on the ordinary 3-D matter in the photon beam
:
Force
oc
1/d
3
oc
1/2
3
oc
1/8 at the sun's periphery.
[This assumes equipartition of mass into each dimension (see above), which may not be correct.]
An additional gravity force on the 4-D hidden matter in the photon beam from the hidden 4-D matter in the sun is also Force
oc
1/d
3
oc
1/2
3
oc
1/8 at the sun's periphery.
5-D and higher terms are small.
But at the Earth's distance from the sun, which is about 200 times the sun's radius
:
Force
oc
1/(2x200)
2
oc
1/160000.
And the gravity force from the hidden matter (4-D matter) in the sun
:
Force
oc
1/(2x200)
3
oc
1/64000000
etc.
The gravity force from hidden matter in the 5
th
and higher dimensions adds further but very small attractive forces, as will "cross-dimension" gravity forces (between 4-D mass of sun and 5-D mass of the moving object, etc).
Neglecting these, the gravity force on a starlight photon
tangential to the periphery
of the sun
oc
1/4 + 1/8 + 1/8
oc
1/2, which is double 1/4, whereas the gravity force on it if it is
tangential to the Earth's orbit
oc
1/160000 + 1/64000000, in which the second term is negligible (only 0
.
24% of the first term).
I.e. the hidden matter's gravitational force causing deflection of a starlight beam
at the sun's periphery
is as great as the ordinary (3-D) matter's gravitational force, whereas
at Earth orbit distance
from the sun, the sun's hidden matter gravitational force is only 0
.
24% greater than its ordinary (3-D) matter's gravitational force.
So the gravitational force of the sun falls off rapidly with distance, reminiscent of the commonly seen net or mesh diagrams of curved "space-time" at a star. Long ago Tesla made an interesting objection to curved "space time", saying that something with no structure (a noumenon) cannot be curved.
This means that the mass of the sun (as is normally calculated from the
Earth's orbit
parameters) will only be about 0
.
24% in error from its normal 3-D mass, which means only a small error due to ignoring its hidden matter content.
Also, the deflection of a starlight beam tangential to the
sun's periphery
will be double that calculated classically using Newton's Law, i.e. the same prediction as that from General Relativity, but without assuming General Relativity.
The value for the sun's mass is calculated from the parameters of the Earth's orbit, which is so far away from it that the 3
rd
& higher order terms (for its hidden matter), in the gravitational force equations, will be quite negligible.
But if a beam of starlight photons grazes the solar periphery, this is near enough to incur these higher order terms and so the deflection of its trajectory is greater than conventionally expected, by a factor of 2.
But as mentioned above the simple calculation above assumes equipartition of mass into each dimension, which may not be correct.
Notes
: The deflection for a photon passing tangentially through the sun's periphery is the same for one proton or for a
group of any number of photons, as it is independent of mass [just as the Moon and Earth, having different masses,
remain in the same solar orbit and do not diverge, and just as a feather and a cannonball hit the ground together if
dropped from a tower (down an evacuated tube)]. The sun's mass (M
s
) is calculated from the Earth's orbit as follows
:
Using Newton's Laws,
F = GM
s
M
e
/d
2
and
F = M
e
a,
so that M
e
cancels out when equating these, i.e. the Earth's mass (M
e
) is not required to calculate the mass of the sun -- so it does not matter if it is not accurate (for this purpose).
Gravitons, if they are Arnoo, would need to be identified as the Arnoo of the 10
th
dimension. If they were the Arnoo of (say) the 8
th
dimension, this would mean that the 9
th
and 10
th
dimension Arnoo would drift away from the location of the lower dimensions
!
B&L report that the 4
th
dimensional (so-called "astral") level is located concentric with the physical world
;
if there were no gravitational force on 4-D matter, the entire 4-D region would drift away into outer space
!
A problem with this is, what prevents the Arnoo of the 10
th
dimension from drifting away? The answer may be that motion is impossible for 10-D particles if the model of motion given earlier [4] is correct - that motion requires a jump via the next higher dimension (the "air bubbles can't move in ice" model, explained in reference 4), as there is no dimension beyond the tenth.
APPENDIX 1:
Further comment on the Equivalence Principle.
Imagine two cases
:
Case g
:
Your room and contents as it is, and,
Case a
:
The same room but located in deep space (away from any planet or other source of gravitational field) within a large lift which is accelerating upwards at an acceleration with the same value as g on Earth, i.e. 9
.
8 m or 32 ft per second per second.
In this room, imagine a large cube which has a small cube with a side-length of (say) a million atoms, stuck to its side at the top.
Now imagine the adhesive comes loose and the small cube drops off.
The small cube of Case g will have a different size to the cube in Case a
:
The small cube in Case a, while falling, is in no gravitational field, unlike the cube in Case g.
While falling, the cube in Case g has a slightly larger gravitational force acting on its lower atoms than on its upper atoms, due to the inverse square law of the Earth's gravitational field (as the lower atoms are nearer to the Earth). Thus the cube of Case g will be slightly stretched (in the vertical direction) compared to the cube of Case a. So its atom spacing in the vertical direction will be slightly greater than that of the Case a cube.
This experiment would distinguish between the effects of the two types of gravitational fields, which contravenes the Principle of Equivalence which is the main principle of General Relativity. The Principle of Equivalence requires that there is no way to distinguish Case g from Case a.
APPENDIX 2:
Anti-gravity devices.
In 1942 German scientists wrote to Hitler that they are developing a flight device that would be decisive in the war. They worked at a secret location in the Sudeten Mountains on the Polish/Czech border, excavated underground several km into a mountain, called the Wenceslas Mine. A high voltage bell-like structure about 3 metres diameter, was later developed above ground inside a restraining circular concrete structure about 60 metres diameter, which is still there. It was named the Kriegen Scheiben ("war disc").
(The above sizes are a guess from the film, shown on More4 TV (UK) about 2006, as "UFOs, The Secret Evidence", a 2 hour documentary made in about 1993 by Oxford Film & Television Productions for Channel 4 TV (UK) and presented by Nick Cook, a competent defence journalist). The vast underground tunnel system was blown up and sealed off in 1945 by the retreating Nazis, but later some items were removed by the Americans. Many tunnels were never re-opened and their secret contents remain sealed off.
Also in the documentary is a present-day small model made of light balsa wood with an extra-high voltage (EHT) wire to it, which levitates off the ground, in the workshop of Tim Ventura, an inventor, in Seattle. It is a triangle of about 50 cm side held by multiple balsa wood spars radiating from its centre, each spar covered in Al foil and a thin wire on insulating spacers is about 3 to 4 cm above it which is connected to a terminal atop a roughly 150 cm high plastic tube about 10 cm diameter, which is probably a typical diode ladder giving EHT. They suggested the lift may be due to an ion wind effect, but the above webpage is the first (speculative) explanation involving Arnoo being lined up electrically, to orient them against gravity.
Caution:
"
Don't try this at home folks
", unless you use a Wimshurst Machine, or a Van de Graaff Generator with dome < 25
cm, or similar, which cannot generate lethal currents at EHT voltages.
Do not use capacitors with it in case they charge up to
deliver lethal currents.
Capacitors may explode if their working voltage is exceeded.
References
to this webpage (Page 14)
:
1.
A. Besant & C.W. Leadbeater, "Occult (Hidden) Chemistry", available as a download on this website (see this website,
Page 10).
2.
Babbit, "Principles of Light & Colour" (details unknown, but published in UK over a century ago)
3.
K. Wakelam, "Vortexes" (request copy from
:
m.hocking@imperial.ac.uk)
4.
M.G. Hocking, "Linking String Theory and Membrane Theory to Quantum Mechanics and Special Relativity Equations,
avoiding any Special Relativity assumptions", Journal of Scientific Exploration (2007). This is available on this website - see
Index Page (Page 10).
