Paramahamsa Tewari, an Indian nuclear engineer and energy researcher, is also the originator of Space Vortex Theory, a theory that posits matter as based on two fundamental particles, the electron and the positron. His website is www.tewari.org
According to Tewari, the universe is filled with an incompressible super fluid. Fundamental particles are vortices that create a tiny spherical void, where circulation at the limiting velocity of light leads to a breakdown of the fluid's integrity. The discontinuity at the void/liquid interface defines the particle boundary. Tension in the external fluid created by the central void gives rise to gravity, while the tangential circulation of the fluid at the interface is the cause of electric field phenomena.
Einstein's Relativity and Quantum theory have failed to develop a conceptual view of the universe and of the matter we perceive. So in this recent piece, Tewari says that mainstream physics should re-evaluate some of its 'certainties'. The super fluid that fills space - the term was coined by Tewari in 1974, only to be hijacked by others a few years later - is precariously balanced at the edge of rotation, of vortexial motion. The dynamics of this liquid explain the existence of both particles of matter and fields in a way that is intuitive and visual. But let's see what Tewari has to say...
To the adherents of Relativity and Quantum theories
If the universe cannot be described through your theories with clear-cut physical pictures that a lay man can understand, the following may set you thinking as to where your concepts went wrong. This departs radically from your 20th century concepts that need deep revision. You held the field and had your say for more than a century now and have led science to the games of probability and uncertainty, of mere chance and coincidences, based on outer appearances rather than the underlying reality.
You scare humanity that the sun will consume all its matter one day, throwing away its energy into the voids of space – never to be retrieved again, as if you knew for sure the basic processes that created matter, stars and cosmic energy. What you name as “empty space (void)” may itself be the “dynamic vacuum of spatial energy”. What you think is “dark matter” could be space-vortices that rotate the planets, stars and galaxies, both axially and around in orbits. You are now searching for the Higgs particle to understand the true nature of “mass” ...
The General Science Journal is a non-peer-reviewed electronic journal that allows all scientific opinions to be aired, particularly in physics. Research papers, essays or communications are accepted in multiple languages for viewing by your colleagues and the general public. They may be submitted at no cost to the respective GSJ Editors (see listing below).
The original of this article is in Russian and this translation of it isn't professional, but I think the news of this is of importance for us and should be shared even if imperfectly.
Chances are, you have not heard of the Republic of Bashkortostan. It is one of many individual States that were part of the old Soviet Union, the USSR, and that now are part of the Russian Federation which formed after the Soviet Union dissolved. Wikipedia has an article on history and more here: Bashkortostan The people of Bashkortostan are the Bashkir.
Ufa City, capital of Bashkortistan (image from Wikipedia)
It seems the farmers of a Bashkir village were successful in creating a workable demurrage-based currency and to have its legality recognized by their country's Supreme Court. Quite a feat, which incidentally has eluded us in the West ever since the Austrian Supreme Court shut down Silvio Gesell's and Mayor Unterguggenberger's successful currency experiment in Wörgl 80 years ago...
So now that we have some context, here is the article. The original in Russian is also available.
Bashkir farmers who invented their own currency have created an economic miracle
The Supreme Court of Bashkortostan allowed the villagers of Shaymuratova to pay in "shaymuratikami." It is a kind of local money - or rather, trade coupons. They can buy products only in one village. A system of mutual settlements is offered by local farmers. But the local prosecutor sought to prohibit this kind of currency .
In this video, Nassim Haramein discusses his research into the structure of space, matter and the universe. He challenges some of the 'everybody knows' parts of physics and proposes a unification of two theories which have so far been thought to be incompatible.
This is a paper that was first published in PESWiki but it certainly deserves to be widely known. It is based on a deep re-thinking of current physics and models the aether as a substrate for all things physical.
While the new model is fully developed in a book: Secrets of the Aether that was published in 2004, authored by David W. Thomson III and Jim D. Bourassa, the paper gives a good description of the basic features and lots of detail about how the new model compares with contemporary physics.
Sterling Allan of PESWiki says about it:
"The Aether Physics Model quantifies quantum structure within an Aether/angular momentum paradigm (as opposed to the mass/energy paradigm of Einstein). It is destined to merge with Quantum Mechanics and provides the means for tapping Zero Point Energy."
"Modern physics describes the mechanics of the Universe. We have discovered a new foundation for physics, which explains the components of the Universe with precision and depth. We quantify the existence of Aether, subatomic particles, and the force laws. Some aspects of the theory derive from the Standard Model, but much is unique.
A key discovery from this new foundation is a mathematically correct Unified Force Theory. Other fundamental discoveries follow, including the origin of the fine structure constant and subatomic particle g-factors, a slight correction of neutron magnetic moment, a geometrical structure for charge, the quantification of electromagnetic charge as separate from electrostatic charge, a more precise meaning of spin, the quantification of space-resonance in five dimensions, and a new system of quantum units.
The Aether quantifies as a fabric of quantum rotating magnetic fields with electromagnetic, electrostatic, and gravitational dipole structures. Subatomic particles quantify as angular momentum encapsulated in a quantum, rotating magnetic field. All quantum, atomic, and molecular processes can be precisely modeled, leading to discrete physics with new understandings and insights."
Money follows, like everything else here on this physical plane, the principles of yin and yang. There is "hard" (yang) money and there is "soft" (yin) money. At this time, the world is dominated by yang money. My purpose with this article is to convince you that we need to find a better balance in matters of exchange and economics.
Do we need money at all?
There are two systems that have historically been used and that are - to varying degrees - still in use today, that allow us to exchange the fruits of our toil and those we appropriate from nature, without the use of money.
There is the gift, which does not require an immediate return. Actually, it's nuanced. Some gifts are freely given without any expectation of return, but if we are talking about a "gift economy", usually the expectation would be that everyone, in some way or another, plays ball. That means, you can't just be a freeloader. Even in a gift economy, there is some expectation for all participants to pull their weight, meaning to participate in the giving. People who only receive and never give will find themselves marginalized, and rightly so. Flows do need to be balanced. If you only inflow (receive) and never get to the outflow part (the giving), things tend to get stuck. The inflow will stop sooner or later. The point is that, even in a gift economy, the principle of exchange cannot be violated with impunity.
Then there is barter. In a barter economy, we also need no money. The exchange is direct. The needs of one are matched with the offerings of another. It is rather cumbersome at times to find a match, and it isn't always successful, but barter has been with us throughout history. It has served us well where money was not available or its use was not practical. Today, there are various initiatives to revive the barter economy. Computers allow us to provide better tools to match offerings and needs. Some of those tools merely let you choose from a larger number of diverse offerings. Others extend the barter concept from a one-on-one exchange to a circle of linked exchanges. A gives to B, who gives to C, who gives to D, who in turn gives to A. Circle closed. Barter has one big problem though. It generally has no time dimension. It is not easy, in a barter economy, to receive something today and to give maybe next week, or to provide your fruit to someone today when you actually don't need anything of theirs right away. That is where money comes in...
Florian Ion Petrescu, an engineering PhD and senior lecturer at the Bucharest Polytechnic University in Rumania, has written about a variety of subjects including physics, mechanical engineering, and the development of flight. His books are available through LuLu publishers at http://www.lulu.com/spotlight/petrescuflorian
One of those books, TURN ON THE LIGHTS! describes how the process of particle annihilation, the destructive interference between a particle and its anti-particle, could be used to obtain comparatively cheap and perfectly renewable energy.
Although using the energy of sub-atomic particles, the process would neither necessitate nor create radioactive particles. It would also be much cheaper and simpler to realize than atomic fusion and present-day atomic fission reactors.
Here is a summary, slightly edited, from a communication printed in the January/February 2012 issue of Infinite Energy Magazine.
The video linked here shows experimental proof of the existence of a magnetic vortex. The direction of rotation changes when magnetic polarity is reversed.
Usually, we see magnetic field lines shown as bending straight back from one end of the magnet to the other. Correctly, what should be shown is magnetic lines of force in a vortex configuration, with flow spiraling into the magnet (or out of it) in a right-hand or left-hand turning motion, depending on the magnetic polarity.
It appears to me that the separation of magnetic poles, and the tension that is created by this stable distancing of two opposing poles, creates rotation which, incidentally, is the seed of all matter.
Indian engineer Paramahamsa Tewari, who is not unknown to readers of this site, is experimenting with what he calls a Reaction Less Generator. Measurements taken by Tewari show that the generator is edging towards useful over unity production of electricity.
Ever since the discovery of electromagnetic induction by Faraday and the invention of electrical generators based on these principles, any efficiency higher than unity obtained from these machines has been ruled out due to the Law of Energy Conservation (LCE) and the Lenz's Law. But, through a new Reaction Less Generator (RLG), under development for some time, efficiency much higher than 100% has been achieved.
Tests are now being performed on a small Motor-RLG set which has a DC Motor coupled to an AC RLG. The test results show the graphs of input power to the drive motor and the output from the RLG.
The lowest line on this graph from www.tewari.org (violet) shows the actual input to the RLG from the coupled motor with 0.8 efficiency. The next higher graph (green ) shows the input to RLG without taking motor efficiency into account. The highest graph (blue) shows the output from the RLG. Even at the moderate speed of 1750 r/m, at which the set is run, the ratio: Output from RLG / Input to RLG is 160% (from the lowest and the highest graphs). With extrapolation it can be shown that at 3000 r/m, the efficiency of the M-RLG set will reach 275 %.
Notes on the graph:
1. Power to electromagnets is not taken into account, as these can be replaced by permanent magnets.
2. Entire power produced in the armature circuits has been taken into account. When higher voltages are induced in each circuit, suitable load resistors can be placed in series with the shunt
3. Drive-Motor efficiency is 80%.
While the test results are encouraging, we aren't quite there yet. The research is still preliminary and useful over unity production of electricity, although seemingly within grasp, may still be off some time into the future. I hope to be able to report more news soon.
For now, development is in progress. Speed is being raised, says Tewari, and detailed tests are continuing.
RLG experimental set-up
The explanation to this new RLG phenomenon, says Tewari, comes from the principles of Space Vortex Theory. That theory goes deeper into creation and stability of the electron, the flow of electrons from atom to atom, as they form a current in a conductor, and the creation of the field structure of electrons. All these arise from the absolute vacuum or space (mass less, nonmaterial fluid).
The positive terminal of a DC generator has a shortage of electrons, while the negative terminal has more electrons. This is because the electrons in the atoms of the armature conductors in rotation are interacting with the magnetic fields that strip them of their orbital electrons and pushes [displaces] them to form the negative terminal. When the positive terminal of the generator is connected to the external stationary output circuit, the electrons of the neutral atoms of the circuit, now in contact with the positive terminal, are pulled by the positive generator terminal and this is a continuing process. The negative terminal supplies the electrons that are pulled from atom to atom -- the process starting from the positive generator terminal. Though the atoms of the circuit conductor do work in pulling the electrons from the negative terminal and up to the positive terminal, their structural energy remains intact without any loss. This is because the electrons as well as the atoms are vortices of a mass less, continuous, non viscous, vacuum. The vortices continue to retain their structure despite their continuing interactions.
In a RLG, by a specific configuration of the armature conductor and the magnetic field, a torque that supports the motor torque is created. This way the armature reaction is nullified and Lenz's law is bypassed. There is no creation of energy from any source. There is no applicability of the Law of Conservation of Energy.
We have erred, though unknowingly, in our design of electrical generators and have remained in error for more than two centuries.
May 26 2011 - This is an appeal for cooperation from G. Edward Griffin (see his Reality Zone Site) which I would like to make available here ... perhaps one or the other of my readers is interested in the chemtrail phenomenon and would like to contribute to ending any uncertainty that still surrounds this "painted skies" mess.
Image: Chemtrails over Rome - December 29, 2010
Can Chemtrails be proved?
It seems that the die-hard skeptics refuse to believe what they see with their own eyes. No matter how many laboratory tests we collect, they always seem to come up with a theory that, no matter how far fetched it is, would explain the high levels of aluminum, barium, and strontium as merely due to some climate condition or error in preparing the chemical sample or some unintended human interaction.
SKI SLOPE THEORY
When we released our documentary, What in the World Are They Spraying, we included snow samples taken from Mt. Shasta in Northern California, which contained toxic levels of these metals. Since snow is merely frozen rain water, it was clear that this came from the sky and not from the soil or water run-off from some toxic waste dump. Nevertheless, an Internet debunker challenged our conclusion by claiming that people ski on Mt. Shasta, and skis are made of aluminum. Therefore, the tested aluminum probably came from the skis! Nothing to worry about after all.
Of course, this was all made-up nonsense. People do ski on Mt. Shasta, but it is a big mountain, and there has never been any skiing in the area where the samples were taken. Even if there had been, that would not explain the high levels of barium and strontium. These metals are not used in the construction of skis. Our debunker never bothered to check on any of that. He was merely looking for some plausible explanation in order to plant doubts into the minds of casual readers. If people are confused by seemingly plausible explanations that even remotely could explain away the high levels of aluminum, barium, and strontium in snow and rain water, they will back away from coming to a conclusion and align themselves with the prevailing view.
Another debunker contacted me a few days ago and claimed that a plausible explanation for the chemicals in snow on Mt. Shasta is that the samples were taken in a year with early snow melt which, according to him, means there was a lot of bare earth exposed at the time, and the wind must have blown dust from the earth onto the snow. Furthermore, he claims that the soil on Mt. Shasta contains the same metals as found in the samples; so, you see? Here is another perfectly plausible explanation. Once again, nothing to worry about.
We are planning to respond to this gentleman as soon as we can find the time to carefully examine his claims about the early snow melt, the amount of bare earth exposed, the composition of the surface soil, and especially the rainfall and moisture levels of the soil during this period. I expect to find that, even if there had been an early snow melt, the soil on Mt. Shasta would have been far too moist and covered with moss, ferns, or other ground cover to make the "dust-bowl" theory even remotely plausible. But it will take a little time to pull the facts together.
Meanwhile, we must not just play defensive and spend our lives answering the debunkers. We must take the initiative and obtain new data and information that will be impossible to dispute. The on-going collection of new snow and rain samples is part of that strategy. After we have literally hundreds of such chemical tests, I think our critics will run out of plausible-denial theories.
One of the most promising technologies to generate hard evidence of chemtrails is the Internet tracking of planes in flight. There are several computer programs and devices that track commercial flights in real time and show, not only their location, but also their flight number, type of aircraft, origin, destination, speed, and altitude. The cost for this App on an iPhone is about $4, and on a computer, it is free. This is amazing technology, and the programs actually are fun to use. They work by receiving what is called ADS-B plane feeds, which are radio signals transmitted by commercial and private aircraft. Military aircraft and those on classified missions do not transmit this signal.
I'm sure you already see where this is going. It is theoretically possible to identify every commercial plane you see overhead either by pointing your iPhone camera at it or locating it on the screen of your computer. If the debunkers are correct, we will find that planes spewing a trail from horizon-to-horizon will all be identified as merely commercial craft and what we see are merely normal contrails after all. On the other hand, if we find that commercial craft do not leave streaks from horizon to horizon but the ones that do are missing from the system ... well, even the most die-hard skeptic would have to take a serious look at that.