FASTER THAN THE SPEED OF LIGHT

As to limiting speed of light in a vacuum: putting more accurate estimates aside, take your pick: 670,616,629.4 miles per hour, 983,571,056.4 feet per second, one foot per nanosecond), 186,282.397 miles per second or as most commonly and conveniently referred to as 186,000 miles per second.

The above was determined to be a constancy principle of cosmology, i.e., the study of the nature and derived principles, referred to as “laws of the universe.”

The most noted name related to this study is that of Albert Einstein, a lifetime hero of mine even though I have disagreed with some of his conclusions.  Though he is credited with the concept of relativity and the special and general theory of relativity, what is little known to the public is that there were philosophers before him who conceived several of the important ideas that Einstein commandeered.  It is the case that e = mc2 is as much a household term as is the name Einstein.  However, consider this also:

The conversion of matter into energy and energy into matter was known in 1704 to Sir Isaac Newton who declared that, “Gross bodies and light are convertible into one another….”

Henri Poincaré, mathematician and philosopher (1900), it is claimed, deserves credit, along with Tolver Preston (1875) for the equation e=mc2.

Since Einstein never correctly derived e = mc2 (Ives, 1952), there appears nothing to connect the equation with anything original by Einstein.

The genius of Einstein, however, was that he saw the relationship of the various concepts to each other that preceded him, that led to what we now call the theory of relativity.   You may be wondering why I’ve given you this short insight into the history of the concept of Relativity.

I want to inform you of another genius, who is a friend of mine.  He is now a man in his late sixties, a resident of Minnesota.  He spent his life studying relativity and the concept, gravity.  He remembered that both Sir Isaac Newton and Einstein clearly admitted that they did not know what gravity is.  When Newton was asked, he replied that he did not deal in conjecture.  Einstein replied that there was no need for the term, ‘gravity,’ in our vocabulary, that it is a metaphysical and mathematical illusion and that there are no such things as Newton's lines of force.

Today, it is no longer believed by some scientists that the speed of light is a constant.  It is commonly understood that the speed of light is altered by the medium through which it propagates and that the speed of 186,282.397 miles per second attributed to it applies only to a vacuum.  However, since space, is sprinkled with free atoms, not to mention that it is permeated with cosmic background radiation (CBR including microwave background radiation (MBR)), it can hardly be defined as empty.

Perhaps we should give credence to Mr. Arthur Larson who had, in his own words,

. . .  come to the conclusion, on March of 1991, that gravity is neither “an attractive force” as Newton had it, nor is it a cause of mass “stressing space” into “geodesic paths,” as Einstein said,

or in plain English, curved space.   Rather, according to Larson, it is an interaction of emission and absorption of gravitons from and within the nuclei of atoms resulting in self-movement of atoms toward one another.

You may wonder what has this to do with the concept of UFOs, Ancient Astronauts, and extraterrestrial intelligence.  There was a period when Carl Sagan cast serious suspicion upon the character of Erich von Daniken by claiming that the vast intergalactic distances of light years would have prevented ancient astronauts from visiting Earth the fundamental thesis of his hypothesis.  Assume Einstein’s constant, the speed of light, is true; as Larson says in his as yet unpublished book, Star Portal,

It is only now truly understood by scientists, if not yet by laymen, that man can never hope to travel the vast, empty spaces between the stars with the present state of the world’s science.  However, . . . there is a solution.  Someday our descendents will travel the galaxy and their eyes will see wonders that we of this time can’t even imagine.  Those future generations will never again have to worry about a possible extinction of man’s species by some natural catastrophe or man-made disaster.

Actually, if Larson’s theories are right and if he really does know how to achieve speeds faster than the speed of light, he has opened the floodgates to intergalactic travel.  According to Larson, when he speaks of FTL, he means speeds that would stagger our ability to understand.  Perhaps that’s why we frequently hear of UFOs popping into and out of our horizons.

It is commonly accepted in the scientific community that the hypothetical particle called, “a graviton,” upon which our concept of gravity is founded, exists.  It has been proven, hypothetically, i.e., mathematically, but not verified, to exist.  There is little doubt of the importance of determining that it does.  Much of the credibility of quantum physics hangs on its discovery.   As Larson points out,

[If my] experiment proves the predictions, and therefore the hypothesis, gravity will be returned to a particularized force instead of lines of force or stressed space.  Gravity would then be quantumized (based on particles) as are all the other natural aspects of Nature.   A quantumized gravity is one of the holy grails of science.  This would be another outcome. ]

Unfortunately, Einstein’s theories have such a tenacious grip on the minds of scientists, physicists in particular, that they find it difficult to think outside the penumbra of “relativity.”  There is a small number of visionary scientists and engineers not so enamored of its accomplishments.  They have begun, for some time now, to question the validity of some of its principles.  These visionaries, however, are not acting merely out of sheer skepticism, though hard evidence does exist to support it.  Larson, as we shall see, is one of them.

For more years than I can remember, I’ve taught my students that all language is about what’s in each of our heads, not about reality.  Mathematicians have taught me as much when they discussed the nature of mathematical language.

Bertrand Russell said: Pure mathematics is the subject in which we don’t know what we are talking about nor whether what we are talking about is true.

G. H. Hardy said: A mathematician is someone, who not only does not know what he is talking about but, also, does not care.

It follows, as night the day, that Einstein’s thesis on simultaneity, one of the bedrocks of Relativity, relates only to perceptions, “what’s inside our heads,’ not reality.  I had failed to make the connection until Larson verbalized it.

These visionaries have found evidence of astral events apparently verifying instances of objects moving at speeds faster than Einstein’s constant.  According to Larson, they are appealing to newfound data that is plagued by dipole anisotropy, i.e., in this case as defined, interpreting “the transmission of the speed of light that varies according to the direction in which it is measured.”  Larson points out that relativists deny the possibility of faster than the speed of light in the cases of Quasar 3C273, Novae Persei, Novae 1987a.  He then lists nine telling reasons why they are wrong and firmly declares:

The list goes on.  Someday relativity will fail of its own weight in absurdities.  But by that time our window for entry into true interstellar space may have been closed.

He is justified in thinking so.

Larson, however, claims to have the answer for keeping the window open.  It lies in thinking outside the box of relativity and conceiving a new theory of gravity.  Such a theory will enable faster than the speed of light (FTL) not by just a few thousand miles faster but by speeds that will stagger the imagination.  Such a theory will get you to planetary systems millions of light years away and back home in as short a period of time as one would take to go on a short errand to the local bakery.

Long ahead of his time, Larson was deeply engrossed in what he conceived to be the weaknesses of Einsteinian Relativity.   He was so one-minded that even at school, his classmates resorted to calling him “Einstein.”  An avid visitor of second hand book shops Larson came upon Einstein’s book Relativity: The Special and General Theory; ISBN 0517-025-320 and meticulously examined the theories and delineated, in sharp detail those he considered to be wrong.  In his own words, he confesses that he’d been

. . . studying Relativity since my high school days, I always wanted to write about it because it was wrong.  In November of 1990, I’d gotten into the habit of going to the kitchen table at night and writing in long hand. . . .  One night in March of 1991, I had to write a paragraph on gravity.  Something strange happened that to this day I cannot explain.  I’d start a sentence and it would write itself.  I just kept writing.  By the early morning hours, I had figured out how gravity had to work and why it works as it does.

That paragraph grew into a three hundred page book that is now not only in my possession but in the hands of his agent as well under the title, Star Portal.

In 1996 NASA announced that it was supporting the Breakthrough Propulsion Physics project whose purpose was to develop faster than light speed.  That announcement was a call directed at visionary scientists and engineers to apprise NASA of any theories or evidence they might have in achieving a means of traveling at the maximum speeds possible, without use of propellant fuels and absent inertial resistance.  Larson was well prepared to take advantage of this opportunity to reveal his years of study and research into Relativity, and his counter-theory of gravity.  Following is the abstract he sent to NASA that led to his being ask to give a presentation of his research:

ABSTRACT

In order to travel interstellar space in reasonable time frames -- rather than lifetimes as present theories and propulsion capabilities dicta --  revolution in spacecraft propulsion theory is required. This propulsion must be attained by natural principles without reaction-mass fuel and be capable of accelerations to superluminal velocities without relativistic limitations, or at the least, allow for the highest possible relativistic velocities. Today's science hasn't been able to envision such a breakthrough concept.  It can be done only with a revolutionary and visionary theory that goes beyond the parameters of today's established science.  My breakthrough concept is a new theory of the gravitational force, which lends itself to being artificially redirected as a spaceship propulsion system. This redirection is called, “Twisting Gravity.”  It utilizes the natural energies inherent in the atoms of the craft itself -- to move itself -- with no reaction mass or engines required. Twisting gravity allows spacecraft to travel to distant star systems, descend to a planet's surface and return in acceptable time frames, utilizing spacecrafts of unlimited size and payload-carrying capability.  It requires no space-stations, shuttles, or any space or moon-based support facilities, nor earth facilities other than for payload and personnel requirements. ©1998 American Institute of Physics.

Unfortunately, NASA also imposed a caveat that was to guarantee its failure.  It required that its goals be accomplished within the parameters of Einsteinian relativity.  In Larson’s words, “In short, NASA is seeking new laws of physics,”. . . tied, however, to relativistic limits.  Such a caveat doomed the project to failure from the beginning as witnessed by the fact that NASA closed down its project in 2002.

Larson, however, with his insatiable interest in the nature of gravity, had no choice but to continue his efforts to make his research known to those with the power and finances to perform the experiments he was convinced would prove this theories right.  To some extent, his life experiences as an avid science-fiction writer and his history of employment held him in good stead.

Now 67 years old, he gave me a short accounting of his developing interest in Relativity.  Immediately after graduating from high school, with the draft hanging over his head, he joined the navy.  It was there that his interest in science continued with a year’s course in electronics.  After the military – 1962, he returned to school and eventually hired on with Univac, later Sperry Univac, then plain Sperry, as a computer engineer, an instructor, and then, for the last dozen years, as engineering manager.

In the intervening years, even though he had no degrees, aside from his presentation at NASA, Larson continued his efforts to present his research and succeeded doing so at various aerospace companies, universities, and even high schools during which time his research was considered extremely important enough for some engineers and scientists to support him, in private.   Even though fearful of political and career repercussions, they did not dare do so in writing, Einstein’s Relativity being the supreme dogma of science.

Larson worked “all over the world” for twenty years before retiring from Sperry to pursue his interest in writing about science.  In the course of doing so, he spent his evenings studying relativity.  To a large extent, he, like Lincoln, was a self-taught man with a sense of intuition that led him to his new theory of gravity that seems to be supported even by the renowned scientist/mathematician, Stephen Hawking who wrote in his book, A Brief History of Time, soft cover, p. 70,

The gravitational force between the sun and the earth is ascribed to the exchange of gravitons between the particles making up these two bodies.

Along with Newton, Einstein, and the community of scientists, Stephen Hawking, too, does not have a clue as to how gravity works.  Larson, however, shows how gravity is made and operates.  This allows him to make two quantitative predictions, that G (the gravitational constant) must be doubled, and Newton's law of gravity must be modified by a factor of two, i.e., F=2( m1m2)/d2.   That can be conclusively tested by a simple experiment.

When Larson developed his theory to his satisfaction, he put it to paper and proceeded to investigate the possibilities for getting the experiments he had devised, actualized and verified.  Not having the financial means to perform them himself, he appealed to other sources.

Larson’s early presentation was with NASA.   Because his theory did not follow the rules NASA had set forth relating to relativity, it did not sit well with the powers that be.

Various disappointing contacts with competitors in the aerospace industry soon alerted Larson to the difficulties he was to experience in his efforts to enhance the greatness of his country.  Aside from the failure of NASA to face the reality of relativity’s inability to offer the world a counterpoint to an exponential explosion of population growth, the following is an example of the disappointments Larson has experienced during the decades after he discovered his new theory of gravity.

In 1998, He sent a letter, with his paper, to the head of Lockheed Martin.  He received a reply from Dr. Ron Paulson, Vice President in charge of engineering, who sent his paper to their people in Palo Alto and Stanford.  The Palo Alto group rejected the paper without technical objections, to the effect that “Mr. Larson had published only one paper and, therefore, it had no merit.”  It was much the same results from the Stanford people.  Explaining that they were short of funds, nevertheless, Mr. Paulson ordered his manuscript, then entitled, Twisting Gravity, and added that if ever he were in a position to do so, he would reopen the subject.

Lockheed Martin held the paper for over a year.  Nearing the end of that period, the company received a contract for 250 billion dollars and Dr. Paulson had been advanced to the position of Vice President of Space Research and Remote Viewing.  With the lessoning of the previous shortage of funds, Paulson arranged for him to give a presentation of his research on February 8, 2002.  It lasted the full day with Dr. Paulson praising it enthusiastically, taking notes for his own internal L/M proposal.  He was so impressed, he offered Larson a consultant’s fee of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars and said he’d see him again in two weeks.  Larson was floating on clouds throughout his trip home.

Three weeks passed without a word, four weeks passed, five weeks passed.  Depressed, Larson sent him an email.  Without explanation, Paulson said he would no longer talk to Larson and that there was to be no communication with him again.   Larson concluded that Dr. Paulson had been instructed to sever all ties with him.  Apparently,

someone in the audience for Dr. Paulson's internal presentation was aware that Lockheed Martin in it’s Skunk Works was working on anti-gravity just as were Boeing, Grumman, NASA, and the British Greenglow project.

On the morning of October of 2004, Larson, while observing the moon through his binoculars, saw a black sphere, in perfect focus, with no wings, engine exhaust, fins or anything.  He noted,

It was nothing we had and it was traveling at just below some cirrus clouds and traveling at between 3 and 5 thousand miles per hour.  I had just watched a jet airliner go by.  Consequently, I was able to compare heights and speeds.  If it was not an alien UFO, then it was an experimental craft of Lockheed Martin using my propulsion system.

As demoralizing as these turns of events were, Larson pursued other possibilities:

I sent a paper to Virgin Air’s, Sir Richard Branston and received a standard postcard brush-off saying that Sir Branston would contact me in the future.  That was about five or six years ago.  Then I sent copies of my paper to the other three persons trying to build their own spaceships, including SpaceShip One.  All were ignored.

At this juncture, my agent, Tom Dark of Heacock Literary Agency, Inc., in California,  introduced me to Larson.  Acting as Larson’s liaison, I communicated with the New York Times, and Newsday of long Island, to determine whether or not they would be interested in Larson’s story.  The Times sent its proforma email and showed no further interest.  Newsday evinced interest, but did not pursue it.  I’ve communicated with Stony Brook University requesting the opportunity for Larson to give a presentation to their Department of Science.  The reply was that since he had no degrees, it wasn’t likely that he’d be asked to give a presentation.

And so it goes.  The means to achieve flight exceedingly faster than the speed of light, along with the experiments that will verify its success or failure could change the course of humanity.  It is beyond comprehension that those with the ability and means to apprise the world of the possibility of such a monumental advancement in knowledge, can be so blasé about advancing its progress.

BELOW ARE ADDITIONAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE NEW THEORY AS EXPLICATED

by

ART LARSON

If my new theory is verified to be true, it will change our conception of the universe.  Before, you could feel that gravity was a mutual attraction and you would never, ever, change it; it was rock solid.  Now you know there are no lines of force (as Einstein also said) that bind you to earth.  Instead, it is merely an exchange of gravitons between your atoms and earth's.  Your atoms are constantly trying to self-move themselves in the direction of the arriving gravitons from earth, i.e., towards Earth's center of mass.  That is where the majority of the gravitons are coming from.  Gravitons come from the sky, the atoms of the atmosphere, our houses, etc, but they are so few in number compared to those coming from earth, they can be ignored.

However, when the moon is directly above us, we are getting some gravitons from it that redirect some of our unbalanced gravitons' recoils towards the moon.  Consequently, we see a natural redirection of our gravity on an atomic scale, every day.  If we had scales sensitive enough, we would see this just as we see the tides.  Our task is to conceive the means to cause this redirection artificially.

This new theory -- if proven true by experiment -- would change many things.  For example, it is said that the moon moves about two centimeters a year away from earth.  According to the laws of conservation of angular momentum, the tides slow the earth down and the moon recedes from the earth.  According to today's science then, if the earth stopped rotating entirely tomorrow, the moon would recede at great speed.  Rubbish!  There is no physical connection between the earth and the moon, only an exchange of gravitons.  If the earth stopped turning tomorrow, the moon would remain in its orbit and its orbit would not change a single iota.

Consider our present-day dogma of the expanding universe.  When Slipher found in 1913 that some of the surrounding galaxies were moving away (13 out of the 15 he observed) due to their red shift, he didn't know why.  When Hubble in 1928 used the Mount Wilson 100 inch telescope, he discovered that the farther he looked the more red shift he saw.

Scientists in those days, as well as today, concluded that light travels through space with no loss of energy because they could not determine how light would lose energy in space.  Since they could not conceive how light could lose energy, they decided that the observed red shift was a result of galaxies' recessions, and, therefore, the universe must be expanding.

Just as the Doppler shift of a sound of a horn approaching you rises in pitch (an audio blue shift) and passing you, decreases in frequency (an audio red shift), it is presumed to be the same with light.  If a galaxy is moving away, according to today’s laws of the universe, its red shift is interpreted to be due to recession.

However, space is not empty.  It has approximately one to ten free atoms per cubic meter.  It is a true medium, albeit very rarified.  So, light traveling though “empty” space would travel as a projectile like a rifle bullet, with no loss of energy; that is true.

However, when the light photon traverses some of these free atoms over millions of light years of travel, the photon propagates through the atomic fields of the free atoms. This causes the photon to lose energy (very little) thereby creating a lower frequency, and longer wavelength as per Planck's law, that we measure as a red shift.

Therefore, though it is true that red shift can be caused by recession, it is caused by light traversing free atoms in space.  Light, then, loses energy over distance!  This distance-related red shift overpowers any blue shift that some far-off galaxy may show because it is coming towards us.  Over millions of light years, this distance-related red shift increases at some average amount per million light years (10 miles per second per million light years) and is cumulative, just as we see.

However science is reluctant to accept this change in forming our laws of the universe and our conception of the universe because if the red shift is basically due to light losing energy, then the expanding universe dogma is false and so is the big bang concept as the beginning of the universe.  This is anathema to most scientists who have totally accepted this false conception of the universe.  If this were ever to be verified to be false, they would all be shown to be wrong.

By the way, we do not see red shifted light as reddish, because it's only the shift in frequency lines (we usually look at the hydrogen lines) that we see in a spectrum.  The bluer frequencies shift towards the red end of the spectrum, and the ultraviolet more towards the blue.  So, we still see the light as white light with all the frequencies.

If my experiment verifies the predictions, and, therefore, the hypothesis, gravity will be returned to a particularized force instead of lines of force or stressed space, i.e., curved space.  Gravity would then be quantumized (based on particles) as are all the other natural aspects of Nature.  A quantumized gravity is one of the holy grails of science and this would be another outcome of this new hypothesis of gravity.

Based on an exchange of particles allows the possibility of artificially redirecting the force of gravity that would result in inertialess propulsion sans fuel at faster-than-light speeds, and opening the gates to the universe.

Inertia also being caused by gravitons and their associated recoils being piled-up when mass is accelerated, there is, therefore, no need for the Higgs Boson or the Higgs field, as it is gravitons that give matter its inertial mass and gravitational mass, not the Higgs Field.  The new LHC is therefore redundant.

We must spread our wings and dare to imagine.