Catastrophism, Inertial Propulsion, and the Irony: An ‘Aether Revivalist’ is Ahead of the Pack
The more one studies in practically any field of science, the more one realizes that the Universe is a harsh wilderness that doesn’t care whether we live prosperously or all die suddenly.
As awkward as it may seem, this is the crux of a conversation about where scientific progress should progress from. If the task is simply surviving in the face of a universe that will eventually try to kill us no matter where we find a comfortable place to call home, which branches of science are the most fundamental and therefore require the most special attention?
Einstein himself was interested in and contributed to the study of geological catastrophism. His support of the Earth Crust Displacement Theory, a controversial theory proposed by Charles Hapgood which explains quite a lot if we look at the Earth’s history, reading into its geology, geophysics, fossil records and so on, did not go unnoticed by the geophysics community even though these contributions were over-shadowed by his works in physics.
One hundred years later still, the results of a staggering number of pieces of geological evidence point to a future that doesn’t look very good for us. Specifically; a planetary catastrophe roughly every 12,000 years. When was the last cataclysmic terrestrial event on record? About 12,000 years ago.
It doesn’t matter what it could be – an asteroid impact from a too small to detect but big enough asteroid, a cyclic solar catastrophe like a coronal mass ejection or a solar flare directed at us, an Earth crust displacement, a seismic or volcanic mega-catastrophe, the list goes on and on – we are extremely vulnerable to civilization-ending cataclysmic events.
Entrepreneurs like Elon Musk get it, clearly seeing the need to make humanity a space-faring civilization as soon as possible (Michio Kaku might call it a Type One Civilization). Others follow in Musk’s footsteps now that people realize that trillions of dollars could be made in asteroid mining. And of course, the financial success of the Starlink satellites is a gift that will keep giving, given no space junk catastrophes.
But rocket propulsion technology, whether it’s re-useable or not, is a terribly inefficient method of propulsion.
I’ll put it this way; If the inevitable Earth catastrophes are like a herd of hungry lions closing in on us, then rocket propulsions is the small plastic fork that we have to defend ourselves.
Reactionless Propulsion
While many are busy calculating the precise angle they must hold the plastic fork in order to poke the lions in the eye, there are more and more well-known physicists ‘reaching for the knife.’ Some are getting lucky; Steve McColluch received a 1.3 million dollar grant from the US Department of Defense for his promising research into ‘Quantized Inertia’ which borrows from the work of William Unruh. Then there’s the NASA backed MEGA Drive developed by Jim Woodward which is also somewhat reassuring. But progress in inertial propulsion moves forward about as glacially slow as the acceleration rates achieved by these devices. Ignoring for a moment that this is mostly due to a lack of funding corresponding to paradigmatic stagnation, some crystallographers, certain quantum physicists, and chemists would agree – the wave structure of matter is still being ignored by too many physicists.
This is actually a huge obstacle to progress in physics and hence, to our survival on a planet which could be rendered practically lifeless if the Sun were to so much as sneeze in our general direction.
Here’s the problem; If we don’t have an accurate enough model for the structure of matter, how would we be able to create a correspondingly clear enough model for how it moves so that we can move out of here? This is directly related to the quantum gravity problem – what are the quantum processes associated with gravity, if any? How can they be visually simulated? And most importantly; how could we possibly create a theory for quantum gravity if we don’t expound on a model for material bodies that’s deep enough (literally and metaphorically) to adequately explain inertia at the quantum level? Sabine Hossenfelder is powerful voice on this topic, focusing her research on Quantum Gravity, Loop Quantum Gravity, and axiomatic problems in physics as a primary obstacle to progress in the field.
We will come back to the aforementioned problems in a moment, but first, it has to said that there exist a handful of reactionless drives that appear to work in very similar ways, whether the creators realized this or not; Two coupled mechanical oscillators yield a small constant acceleration for that coupled system. Whether it’s the MEGA Drive, the Dean Drive, Thornson’s Inertial Engine and so on, it’s usually a very similar story.
Even the theoretical Alcubierre Drive which NASA takes quite seriously, looks suspiciously like to two large oscillators which warp the fluid medium by producing phase-frequency differences in relation to each other. The theoretical image offered is this; reminiscent of the De Broglie-Bohm Pilot Wave Theory and similar to a gigantic unproven version of the Ivanov-Didin bathtub experiment, the device rides the wake of the wave that it creates. This is a theoretical device where the passengers could theoretically, calmly play billiards while the space-ship accelerates to light speed and above.
Sharpening The Knife
Following in the wake of de Broglie, Rhythmodynamics by Yuri Ivanov is the only branch of physics which meticulously expounds on the mathematics and physical principles behind reactionless propulsion in an understandable way that is experimentally proven. After reading this book, one will not be able to help but notice that the creative inventors of certain inertial drives were so close to inventing a device that could have about a million times more simple.
The insights contained within Rhythmodynamics are all made possible for three reasons:
- Ivanov acknowledges the existence of a missing axiom in Euclidian geometry which states the existence of a carrier of constructs, a base medium for vibrations to propagate in. In theoretical physics modeling this corresponds to a fluid medium which propagates electromagnetic waves – aether.
- Material bodies are modeled as a standing wave structure with atoms at the nodes of the standing wave, holding each other together via the wave ties they create between each other through their vibrational modes.
- The compression of a standing wave structure (the decrease in distance between standing wave nodes nodes) in the presence of a unidirectional flow of the medium (wind) is taken into account.
With this, Ivanov was able to rigorously explain the null results of the Michelson interferometer experiment and create a highly useful wave interference software program in order to simulate these elementary principles of wave mechanics and standing wave mechanics which can then be applied to the electrodynamics of moving material bodies and the self organization of oscillator systems.
21st Century Aether Physics
Contrary to what many physicists have thought about his work – Ivanov is keeping up with the times.
The stakes are high and let’s not forget, we live in the 21st century! The days of theoretical physicists writing a couple books, a handful of papers and calling it good, is past. We have computers now; any serious theoretical physicist needs to be able to unambiguously visually simulate any model they are using, creating or refuting in order to educate anyone who wants to learn their material. Because, let it be clear, given what we need to do – get out of here so we don’t die – clever thought experiments and pages of impeccable math will not be enough to accomplish the task. Stephen Wolfram would probably agree; We need to use software and AI to the best of our advantage, both for education and modeling/simulating.
What a strange turn of event of events that someone who has focused on proving the existence of the ‘luminiferous aether,’ a term many physicists now consider to be archaic, is one of the few who have written the educational software program to go along with his theories and and explain the results of his and other experiments.
How many have been turned off by physics because its axiomatic problems and corresponding lack of clarity? What has this done to terrestrial technological progress? And why is physics so slow to officially accept the fluidic nature of electromagnetic medium and the indispensably useful analogies therein? Is it just an over attachment to General Relativity which didn’t require aether’s existence in order to prove what it set out to prove? Partly, yes.
However, on the one hand, the minds of too many physicists have crystallized into unteachability, which is the essential definition of stupidity, and on the other hand, not enough funding gets where it needs to go given the precarious circumstances which confront our existence.
The remedy is this: An easy to understand wave interference software program and corresponding theoretical model that will educate the masses of soon-to-be adults by stimulating their vision-logic in a unique way. With this software, the insights of Ivanov’s Rhythmodynamics positions physics wisely.
Surely, this fantastic open-source program will be developed and developed over the years, eventually being directly connected to a mold printing device. Together, the program and the printing device will design and build some of the first truly effective non-reactive propulsion systems to get us out of here before our twelve thousand years up.
Until then, happy studies!