Article reference:

Physics: Dissidents Challenge Standard Model - Discuss Alternatives

The Natural Philosophy Alliance, founded by John E. Chappell, Jr., provides a place where alternatives to mainstream physics can be discussed and new models developed in a friendly and cooperative spirit. The exchange of ideas between peers - all of the members of the NPA point out one or the other problem with the Standard Model - is fluorishing. An active chat-line and several websites, but also conferences held each year provide a meeting ground for today's dissidents of physics.


The official NPA website:

List administrator is David de Hilster who is also a film maker. His work in progress is Einstein Wrong The Miracle Year.

David has also set up a dedicated social networking group on Ning, where discussions may take place. Anyone who can contribute ideas is invited. Check it out at

The latest in-person conference of the Natural Philosophy Alliance was held from 7 to 11 April this year, at the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque. Summaries of the papers presented were compiled by Robert Heaston. They are included in a report on the conference which is available in PDF format here and on the NPA's website.

The topics of discussion:

- - -

Philosophy of Science.

Twelve papers intentionally evaluated the past, present, and the future of the physics paradigm. Challenges are expressed as questions. Are changes in Newton's law of gravity necessary? Can we believe that the Maxwell equations are universally applicable? Is Einstein's light postulate still valid? Are critical cosmological data being ignored? If the big bang theory is flawed, what should take its place? Could rearrangement of the primary building blocks of the current physics paradigm provide leads to new theories? What are the connections between electricity and gravity? What is dark matter? Do the laws of motion and spacetime need to be reexamined? Is the universe finite or infinite? Does the goal of a theory of everything make sense? WANTED: An idea here that can influence thinking everywhere.

Special Relativity Theory.

The special theory of relativity (SRT) was formulated by Einstein in 1905. Two principles/postulates are associated with SRT.

(1). Principle of Relativity: The laws by which the states of physical systems alter are independent of the alternative, to which of two systems of coordinates, in uniform motion of parallel translation relatively to each other, these alterations of state are referred.

(2). Light Postulate: Any ray of light moves in the "stationary" system of co-ordinates with the determined velocity c, whether the ray is emitted by a stationary or by a moving body.

Six specific consequences are associated with these two statements: Lorentz transformation equations, red shift, twin paradox, clock changes, length contraction and mass-energy equivalence. Eleven papers address issues concerning SRT. Modern technology based upon accelerometers and computers can independently tell which set of coordinates is going the fastest so that the relativity postulate may have to be reformulated. The twin paradox, clock changes, and length contraction are acceleration dependent and are a general relativity theory (GRT) issue not an SRT issue. The Global Positioning System (GPS) corrects for changes in clock rates caused by acceleration and gravity. A bi-directional wavelength correction may be applied to the Einstein-Lorentz equations to improve experimental results. A thought experiment employing 16 clocks confirm clock changes and length contraction. Special considerations are necessary if moving objects involve electric charges. Any analysis of SRT involves a definite requirement to identify, assess and control the assumptions involved. The light postulate must consider the absolute phase speed and the relative speed of the wave front. It is possible to show that the length contraction and clock retardation come only from using the relativity principle.


Electromagnetism contributes more to modern technological society than any other discipline. Pull a plug or let a battery, alternator or generator go dead and see what happens. The subject is mentioned in most of the 88 papers, but only five papers give electromagnetism special attention. Many famous names are mentioned in these five papers: Ampere, Coulomb, Einstein, Gauss, Heaviside, Landau, Lienard, Lifshitz, Lorentz, Minkowski, Maxwell, Wiechert. There is still something to be learned about electromagnetism. An effort has been on-going for three years on how to model charge clusters on a spinning charged ring. Electrical and magnetic fields were studied to determine how forces on a ring could be unbalanced so as to propel the ring. Three different relativity theories were evaluated in terms of observer-dependence of electric and magnetic fields. Five apparently disparate discoveries within electromagnetism and other subjects are brought together in a coherent context. An analysis was performed on how very high energy current densities could be created using a DC source.

Quantum Mechanics.

Two great advancements in physics dominated the 20th century: relativity and quantum theories. They developed along parallel paths. Relativity was a follow-on to classical mechanics, the macroscopic world and analog processes. Quantum theory was a new addition to science with the creation of quantum mechanics, the microscopic world and discrete quantized units that have exploded into a digitized reality. The cross-over between the quantum and the relativity domains is by way of wave-particle duality. This is a growth area for the Natural Philosophy Alliance since the major focus in past years has been on relativity-related physics. This section was divided into two parts during the 15th NPA Conference: "Particles and Quantum Mechanics" and "Waves and Quantum Mechanics". Both sections have been combined here for two reasons; there were only 15 papers that were on quantum mechanics and it was often not possible to tell whether waves or particles were emphasized.

Since the 15th NPA Conference coincided closely with the 150th anniversary of the birth of Planck on 23 April 2008, it was appropriate to review the role of the Planck constant, the "quantum of action" that started the quantum revolution. Progress has been made on the development of a new type of holor called a twinor that explains photon entanglement. The integer and the fractional multipliers of the quantum Hall effect were evaluated. Different statistical interactions of fermions and bosons were analyzed. Electrons may be portrayed with a dual spin. A cogent argument is presented that the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment exhibits locality and realism. A matrix structure of the vacuum is suggested. The general characteristics of wave motion are described. The characteristics of the overall electromagnetic spectrum are analyzed and defined in terms of rays and beams. Newton, Galileo and Bohr models are used to discuss the various wavelengths of the electromagnetic spectrum. Maxima in radiation are described and interpreted. Wave motion is explained by introducing a dipole-field geometry for the photon. Quantum variables do not commute because the initial state of a quantum system is indeterminate. Quantum mechanics can be accounted for if it describes the interaction of three vector fields. The energy relationships of an object moving within a volume that is moving within a volume that is moving within another and so forth are analyzed.

Max Planck's 150th anniversary, 23 April 2008, is a welcome opportunity to devote some thoughts to the history and the role of his "quantum of action", h, which he hesitatingly established in 1900. The occurrences of the so-called Planck constant appear ubiquitous in physics ranging from the radiation law (the "cradle of quantum physics") and Planck's units to some aspects of nanotechnology. Quantization is considered a first-rate revolution in physics, but is there really a continental divide between "classical" and "post-classical" physics? Giving preference to mathematical reasoning à la Heisenberg, 20th century physics arrived at questionable conclusions in spite of numerically correct results.


In the program of the 15th NPA Conference, this section was listed as "Gravity, Galaxies, Stars and Planets" so that participants would know what specific topics were of interest. The more expansive title is used here because it is shorter and all 13 papers address cosmological interests. We begin with a paper that presents arguments on how all natural forces, including gravity, can be reduced to a single force. Subsequently three papers about specific astronomical events appear. After that there is a series of papers starting with an overview of 20th century cosmology, a paper that focuses on the flaws in big bang theory, and that brings us to three papers on the LB/FLINE model of the origins of our solar system and the relationships that apply across the universe. The last four papers discuss the strong evidence that the Earth and other objects in space are growing, with particular suggestions on how spiral galaxies grow.


From the beginning, natural philosophy has been based upon mathematical laws. Galileo declared nearly 400 years ago that the "Magnificent book of the universe is written in mathematical language." Einstein, as well as others of the mainstream physics paradigm, overestimated the possibility of understanding nature through mathematics alone. The "If, then" language of both mathematics and the phenomena of nature must be forged together. Eight papers focused on the use of mathematics as a tool to provide new insights on the physics of reality. We were reminded of the mathematical definitions of space and time, of infinitesimals and instants, and of the shape of space and the consciousness of time. Mathematics was used to redefine the concept of force that shows the way to a revised description of the universe based upon the redefinition of the four fundamental forces as force laws. On the one hand, more complex mathematics in the form of four-vectors helps to improve the explanation of electromagnetism. But on the other hand, the number of coordinates used to define Lorentz motion was simplified by reduction to a single frame. Another approach to Einstein-Lorentz transformations successfully adapts namespace analysis from computer science. The development of visual techniques of displaying topological relationships introduces a unique tool to define particle hierarchy.

General Relativity Theory.

General relativity theory (GRT) provides the primary road map of modern cosmology. However, discussions of dark matter, dark energy, multiple universes, and acceleration of the expansion of the universe raise questions about the current paradigm. In addition the quantum-relativity/gravity issue is still an unresolved problem. Seven papers made statements to add something to the ongoing dialogue. The correlation of Einstein's personal correspondence with his technical publications permits an historical reconstruction of the significance of the equivalence principle in the beginning stages of the derivation of the Einstein field equations of GRT. The Einstein field equations have an alternative solution where matter collapses to energy with a constant gravitation potential of the speed of light squared. Four postulates lead to the derivation of graviton equations, an equation for the universal gravitational constant, and plans for a graviton experiment. A compound model not only explains the perihelion of Mercury but also describes the orbits of the planets from Mercury to Neptune. An intuitive model of a central collective gravitational mass is suggested.

Contact address:
Natural Philosophy Alliance
402 Russell Avenue
Gaithersburg, MD 20877-2864
phone (301) 987-6742

Almost all of the NPA's 2008 conference abstracts and many of the papers are available at

All members of the scientific community are welcome to join in discussion of these papers and other topics at the above website, at or at 2 user groups: and

If you have questions, the contact is David de Hilster


Eddie Sines said "Yes, I have passed my concept to NPA some time ago and never heard any thing back from them, just one more dead end?" and, attaching his patent application for a METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DIRECT ENERGY CONVERSION (PDF), he added: "See attached. Maybe you have some pull with the NPA. With all these brains they should be able to tell me why this concept will not work? Pass this to them and see where you get."

While I could have forwarded the file, I did not think it would be very efficient in getting the subject matter looked at. So I responded:


it is not a question of passing your concept to the NPA and expecting them to figure out why it will or will not work.

I could pass it on to them, but it seems a very inefficient method of dealing with the question. NPA is a collection of individuals like you and me. Most of them have their own theories or partial theories, and all of them have some kind of issue with the standard model of physics.

If you want to interact with them, you can't just dump your idea on them and expect them to come back with useful comments. Start by frequenting their site and get on their chats. You'll see what they are discussing. When you have an idea of how things go, start throwing in tidbits of yours. This way they get to know you and you get to know them.

Most of the people in the NPA are theorists. You are an experimenter, but with a bent on also explaining theoretically what you see. I have recently seen some messages saying that experiment should be emphasized more than before. Perhaps a real synergy can develop, where your experimentalist hat allows you to inject some useful ideas and their teorists' brains can throw something back at you. But in any case, discussion is a give-and-take. If you want to tap their collective brains, you got to give them something more than just a file...

Kind regards

Coming straight to the point here, “Standard Model” physicists and dissidents alike could benefit immensely by answering this seemingly simple yet profound question – wherein may well lie the entire future of fundamental physics:


A textbook scholar would say no, since that's what the textbooks say.

A true scientist, on the other hand, would substantiate his/her answer, whether it be yes or no.

Alternatively, such a worthy scientist (who would also believe in the dictum, To Thine Own Self Be True) would, with reason, accept or refute what is given in (1). If it's a refutation, then the gratuity of US$25,000, already held by the contender’s university physics department head, would be my way of saying an overwhelming and wholehearted – Thank You.

For any skeptic to see how it all would fit into an all-embracing and final model on the nature of things, a one-page summary is given in (2). (It followed many critical questions from readers that seemed to tell me that such readers want everything on page one, though the answers were all there in depth in my book and web pages!)
Eugene Sittampalam


Acceptance to debunk my model would also be most reassuring to those now entering the field of basic research and thereby to the future of science itself. Further, it would prove as baseless the belief of many that any unconventional alternative is summarily dismissed by the mainstream in its quest for the unification of physics; and the reason: the mainstream today is led by the nose by a dogmatic establishment under the control of a powerful lobby, with vested interest in the status quo, which has turned basic physics – with its two major concepts, general relativity and quantum mechanics, irredeemably at loggerheads with each other – into a booming international business at public expense and the waste of invaluable human resources.

Has anyone read Joseph Newman's work, and/or read about him on his web-page in regard to this work?


Dr Vidyardhi Nanduri promotes the Unity in Science and Philosophy through Cosmology Vedas Interlinks

1. The Science of Philosophy: Divinity, Vedas, Upanishads, Temples & Yoga
2. Philosophy of Science: Plasmas, Electro-magnetic fields and Cosmology
3. Resource: Reflectors, 3-Tier Consciousness, Source, Fields and Flows
4. Noble Cause: Human-Being, Environment, Divine Nature and Harmony


PLASMA VISION OF THE UNIVERSE-1993 (Reg No: TXU 729718 ) (No# Pages-95, Figures 58)

THE VISION OF COSMIC TO *PREM UNIVERSE-1995 (Reg No: TXU 893693 ) *PREM: Plasma Regulated Electro-Magnetic Universe (No# Pages 148, Figures 56)

• VEDIC VISION OF THE UNIVERSE-1996 (Reg No:TXU729719)(No# Pages 137, Figures 35)

• VEDIC VISION OF THE UNIVERSE-II, 1997(Reg No: TXU 893691)(No# Pages 122, Figures 16). It is Based on Vedas,Upanishads and Scientific relevance to Cosmology

• VEDIC VISION OF THE UNIVERSE- Part 3, 1997 (No# Pages 150). Background information on Vedas, Puranas articles on Cosmology

• THE SCIENTIFIC ESSENCE OF COSMIC PHILOSOPHY-1999 (Reg No: TXU 982-556 ) (No# Pages 88, Figures 39) It is based on the science of philosophy and the philosophy of science and integration.

• OM COSMIC CONSCIOUSNESS TO COSMOLOGY REVISION-2000(Reg No: TXU 982-559) (No# Pages 94, Figures 16)

• FRONTIERS OF SCIENCE (1996) Background Research Papers: NEWTON to PRESENT DAY (No# Pages 175) (Being updated)

• UNITY OF CONSCIOUSNESS IN SCIENCE, RELIGION AND PHILOSOPHY (Revised Feb. 2002) (Reg No: TX 5-574-909) (No# Pages 100, Figures 17). It includes questions on the cosmos.


• SEARCH BEYOND DARK MATTER-COSMOS YOGA SERIES-I 10^3 LY-Tamasoma Jyothirgamyam TXU 1-282-571(June 2005),Copy rights USA

• Centre of the Universe-Heart of the Universe-Nov 2006 - Copy Rights TXU 1-364-245 -The Science in Philosophy- Pridhvi Viswam Asya DharineemCosmos yoga vision series-II- cover upto 10^5 Light Years



DR Vidyardhi Nanduri, 3, Vikaspuri, Hyderabad-500038-INDIA
Ph 91-40-32957113/416-628-8283 - email:

Here is a comment from Socratus that was made by email, but which I would like to post for readers to see.

Time. My opinion.

There are two kinds of time:

a) proper (individual) time and
b) planetary time.

They are so familiar that we rarely give them thought. Don't we know, that time for living being is limited and the planetary time is absolute for them ? It is. But Einstein had another opinion. He wanted to know: "Where does the conception of time come from?", "What is the essence of time?". And to explain these questions he created two theories: SRT and GRT.

1. SRT explains behavior and the proper time of light quanta/electron. Why do I think so?
a) One law (postulate) of SRT says that speed of light quanta is constant c=1. Second law says no another particle can reach this speed. So there are two incommensurable quantities. Is it possible to bind them together? No. I was taught at school from the first class that incommensurable quantities cannot be compared. The connection between these incommensurable quantities is similar to the decision of a problem: "What will be if a whale attacks an elephant?"

We can see a whale in the ocean and an elephant in a the savanna, but they never meet and fight in the same "frame of reference". And the same is true about light quanta and other particles. We cannot see them together in SRT. We can meet only the light quanta in SRT and no other particles in it.

b) SRT was born from Maxwell's theory and it is a continuation of the development of electrodynamics. The electron is a main and single hero in Maxwell's theory and SRT. There isn't the Maxwell's theory / SRT without electron. It is not correct to compare electron/ light quanta with other particles (protons etc.) and bodies (billiard balls, satellites, astronauts, "twins") because they cannot produce electromagnetic fields. The electron and the other particles are also incommensurable quantities. They are absolutely different objects.

c) Every epoch has its own delusion. Maxwell and Boltzmann tried to explain electromagnetic fields using balls, wheels, cog-wheels, springs, etc. Now we try to compare electron/photon ability with astronaut's and "twins' " opportunities. It is mistaken, but what to do? We do it because this is our way of cognition: "From vague wish to the bright thought".

2. So, how does SRT explain time from electron/ light quanta point of view.

a) When light quanta is in state of rest its time is frozen, and its own clock shows zero.

b) When photon moves with constant speed c=1 its time is also frozen, and its own clock still shows zero.

c) Only when photon moves with speed c >1 its zero time changes and limited time appears. In this situation we know photon as an electron. Photon works as an electron
and SRT explains this process.

d) And when, for example, electron emits from an atom and interacts with Vacuum, all its parameters change. Its limited time ends and its own clock shows zero again. Now it lives in infinite/ eternal Vacuum until new incarnation, until its new work, maybe in an atom (molecule), or in a cell, maybe in a blade of grass or in a tree, maybe in an animal or in a person. In another words: "We are living beings as long as Light quanta/Electron is present and works in our body."

e) Trying to understand "the electrodynamics of moving bodies" Einstein wrote that it is the result of time and space changes. It is not exactly correct, because these changes are secondary in SRT. And the first point of SRT is that light quanta changes its spin. The former Planck/ Einstein's spin (h) changes in Goudsmit / Uhlenbeck's spin (h = h / 2 pi), and as a result of this act, all its parameters change and the time and new space appear.

3. GRT explains the conditions of gravitation and the secret of planetary time. Why do I think so?

a) When Einstein worked on GRT, he asked astronomers: "What is the average mass of matter in the Universe?" The result was lamentable. The quantity of mass was insignificantly small. It was impossible to keep gravitation law with such insignificantly little mass and so, the Universe must be "open", endless. But what to do with the infinite space, Einstein didn't know. Therefore he took (from the heaven) "the cosmological constant" in order to "close" the Universe. The taken mass was enough for creating the condition of gravitation. Without " the cosmological constant" the Universe is endless.

b) In 1922 Friedman wrote, that we could not use "the cosmological constant" in calculation. Instead of it, it is enough to take "time" and the Universe will be "closed". Friedman was correct, but why? Because "time", by its nature, is a limited physical quantity and, when used in mathematical calculation, automatically gives "closed" result.

c) So, the detected material mass of the matter in the Universe is so small (the average density of all substance in the Universe is approximately p=10^-30 g/sm^3) that the gravitation law doesn't work. Astronomers and astrophysicists know about this fact and therefore (to save the law of gravitation) invented new matter calling it "dark matter", a new kind of energy called "dark energy" and other abstract objects. This "invention" is only a result of our mentality, which says: "If in a theory you meet infinity it means the theory is nonsense". It is very hard to accept that the Universe is infinite. It is no easy matter to give up a lifetime of habit.

d) In my opinion it is impossible to apply GRT to the Universe as a whole. The Newton/ Einstein gravitation laws are correct only in local parts of Vacuum. The Universe / Vacuum as a whole is endless.

e) So, how does GRT explain time?

According to GRT, time depends on the mass and speed of moving matter. It believes that different masses and speeds can create different time. For example, our planet Earth has its own time but for us it is absolute. The other planets have another mass and speed and therefore they have their own time. This time according to GRT is relative. But their habitants will think their time is absolute. But if they know GRT they will not make this mistake.


According to SRT and GRT time is relative.

SRT says about proper/ individual time of an electron/ light quanta.

GRT says about planetary time of a Planet.

Time cannot exist without matter and speed, in another words, without moving matter. But different reasons and different motion of matter create proper and planetary time.


Is it possible to see the different manifestations of time in a human being?

There is an article "Even the time is pressed from fear" by Dr. Vadim Chernobrov (collaborator of MAI -- Moscow Aviation Institute). He wrote that we usually think time is a constant quality. But Einstein's relativity theory says time is relative.

Question. Is it possible to check it in our life?

Answer. Russian and foreign researches say it is possible. The documents (secret in the past) testify that "cataclysm of time", "phenomenon of time's perversion", "changes (deceleration) of time" often is observed by people whose profession is connected with risk: astronauts, pilots, drivers, soldiers.

1. The test pilot Mark Gallay wrote in his book "The test in the sky" when his airplane caught on fire "time began to go in a different scale. Time almost stopped. Every second expanded, and in this situation it was possible to do many things." He confirms that he experienced this feeling many times.

2. Test pilot Marina L. Popovich said the same: in dangerous, catastrophic situations "the time is stretched".

3. In June 1989 a soviet airplane MIG-29 crashed near Paris, at Le Bourget airport, during an air show. The notes of "the black box" showed that during four (4)seconds the test pilot Anatoly Kvochur made as many operations as in normal situation it would take several minutes. The test pilot later said: "time was stretched".

4. The captain N.Z. (fought in Afghanistan) remembers: "the flight of the bullet was so beautiful that I didn't think to evade it, although I had enough time to do it".

5. The sergeant V. Ch (fought in Afghanistan) told: "The black barrel of the gun seemed very big, even enormous. Time stopped and full silence came. And I moved slowly a step aside and the bullet passed close to me."

6. Etc.

His conclusions: People in a critical situation, on the border of death, suddenly for themselves begin to see everything as in slow motion film and in this time their speed of reaction and power increase by tens and hundreds of times. And this explains:

a) why a man who escaped from wolves, can quickly reach up the top of a naked tree,

b) an old woman took out a big trunk from her burned house, which later two strong firemen couldn't raise.

c) etc.


My experience.

The speed on the curve was so fast that I went on other road line and flew straight at the "forehead' of a green mercedes. The driver of the mercedes was in panic. He threw the wheel and closed his face with his hands in horror. Suddenly the time stopped for me and I made many actions before my car kicked only the side back door of the mercedes.

It was long time ago, but writing this article I understood better what happened. In that time most neurons of my brain stopped their electric pulse (time almost stopped) and my Light Quanta/ Electron in this new condition (superconductivity) had possibility to increase my speed of reaction and power in a short period of time and maybe saved my life. I must thank Him.


Best wishes.

Goran Mitic says in an email:

Dear Mr Sepp Hasslberger!

My respect and congratulation!

I invite you to take part in the new revolution in physics!
I wrote a book, THE INTRODUCTION INTO NEW PHYSICS-part one, which has tremendous scientific significance!
Please, see to see what I am talking about.
If you are interested, please let me know, I will send you e-book.

On introduction into new physics: New theories will require new founding principles--- definitely not the concept of "relativistic mass" . It is an erroneous conclusion from relativity theory. A reference " Discovering Universal reality" available at this website elaborates on my above remarks.So. 'mass relativity' is not correct and now to introduce 'mass relativity in relation to temperature" is to jump many ladders without formulating a fundamental definition of mass itself. With the new definition of mass, inertia, momentum, kinetic energy, mass-energy relation need to be first derived before explainig temperature effect and revealing contribution of mass on temperature. I believe only brief comments can be given here. Briefly, Goran's concept need further dvelopment at still deeper level.

Best wishes,

Paramahamsa Tewari

Dear Mr Tewari,
Thanks for your comments!
With all my respect I must remind you at some things.
The change of a mass first has been detected in experiments with accelerated particles at the end of 19 century, before Einstein's theories of relativity.
Because of that fact Einstein gave his relativity of a mass, and all the rest, in dependance to velocity!
Velocity and temperature are naturaly and inseparably connected!
Why is so difficult for you to accept temperature relativity of a mass?
Furthermore, if we want to have exact definition of a mass we must first understand how does it act in different situations, including changes of temperature!
My book is ONLY THE INTRODUCTION INTO NEW PHYSICS and I do hope that THE NEW PHYSICS will create alltogether!
Please, read entire my book, your comments are very welcome!
All the best!

Here's something different!

Is it right?

Dr. Milo Wolff's new book: Schrödinger's Universe

The increase in mass can also be explained by extending Weber type models that use relative velocity approaches. For example, see arXiv article arXiv:0808.3798

Cosmology articles Parts I and II
-1999Dec-2000-May -Outlined the Concepts.
Detailed Research projections are in
1.Vidyardhi Nanduri, 2003, Cosmology structures-New Modeling, Carnegie Observatories centennial Symposium-3, Groups of Clusters, Jan 2003
2.Vidyardhi nanduri ,May 2003,Cosmic Pot Energy: New Projections-sd.stsci. edu/astrophysical_laboratory/proceedings.html
Search Further in
INDEX :Cosmology,Cosmogony,SpaceScience,Philosophy,consciousness,interlink fields,alternate cosmology, cosmology-vedas,Cosmology Interlinks, Space Exploration, Knowledge Expansion, Centre of the Universe , Vision Models of the Universe , Dynamic Universe