HOME     |     PHYSICS     |     BIOLOGY     |     CHEMISTRY

EDITORIAL NOTE

This debate solely admits technical comments expressed in due scientific language without any record of their originators. Comments may be edited for their reduction to essential points. We discourage the submission of arrogant or offensive comments. The editorial rules of this Dialogue are those adopted by Wikipedia.

The Editorial Team

November 26, 2017

Open Debate

# Geometric and experimental evidence on the lack of expansion of the universe, the need for antimatter galaxies and the new era in cosmology

EDITORIAL NOTE: In view of a growing rejection in the scientific community of the conjecture of the expansion of the universe, the ensuing serious problems of scientific ethics and accountability protracted for about one century, and the apparent misuse of hundred of millions of dollars of taxpayers money. In Part I of this Debate we shall first present the list of inconsistencies for each of the seven conjectures of 20th century cosmology, namely:

Conjecture I: the expansion of the universe.

Conjecture II: the acceleration of the expansion.

Conjecture III: the big bang.

Conjecture IV: the expansion of space itself.

Conjecture V: the cosmological inflation.

Conjecture VI: the dark matter.

Conjecture VII: the dark energies.

Each conjecture proffered in support of the preceding failing conjecture, and all conjectures aimed at the maintaining of Einstein's special relativity in the large scale structure of the universe, all conjecture being studiously conceived not to be experimentally verifiable on Earth.

In Part II of this debate we shall present the diversified experimental evidence acquired with experiments Earth on the lack of expansion of the universe and the consequential lack of physical value of the subsequent six conjecture of the series. In Part III we shall then present the main lines of the new renaissance in cosmology.

The conceptual, geometric and experimental evidence on the lack of expansion of the universe presented in this debate have been derived, at times copied 'at litteram,' from the fifty year long studies by Prof. R. M. Santilli, see the recent general review [1,18-44], the specific works quoted in the references, and the Prof. R.M. Santilli Curriculum for complete listing. Independent contributions are available in the complete list of papers, interviews and PRWeb Releases [2, as well as the following interviews on the inconsistencies of the plethora of current cosmological conjectures

Prof. R. M. Santilli's 2013 Interview by ta French Agency in Martinique

Prof. R.M. Santilli 2015 American Freedom Radio

Prof. R.M. Santilli 2017 interview by Midnight in the Desert

Prof. R. M. Santilli (age 83) email for thsoe who want to contact him is: research(at)i-b-r(dot)orgM

We invite orthodox physicists to present their dismissal in the apposing window available in each section that assures anonymity of the author. We invite, in particular, orthodox physicists in disproving problems of scientific ethics and accountability claimed as being caused by their continued addition of unverifiable conjectures for the evident intent of maintaining the validity of Einstein special relativity in the large scale structure of the universe, rather than admitting its inapplicability as established by a rather vast number of experimental evidence acquired on Earth.

PICTURES FOR POSTING. Please send pictures in jog to admin(at)galileoprincipia(dot)org by indicating the debate and section for posting.

PART I:
GEOMETRIC EVIDENCE ON THE LACK OF EXPANSION OF THE UNIVERSE

I.1. The Hubble law.

In 1927, the American astrophysicist Edwin Hubble [3] discovered that the frequency of light reaching Earth from far away galaxies decreases in a way essentially proportional to the distance, an effect known as the cosmological redshift, resulting in the expression known as the Hubble law

z = λobservedemitted - 1 = H d/c = H' d,    (1)

where: z is the cosmological redshift; λobserved is the wavelength of light measured on Earth; λemitted is the wavelength emitted by the galaxy; H is the Hubble constant; d is the distance of the considered galaxy from Earth; and the speed of light c is assumed to be 1, c = 1, otherwise law (1) would read z = H' d, where H' = H/c is also a constant. Following ninety years of astrophysical measurements. Hubble's law (1) is nowadays an experimental reality beyond any possible or otherwise conceivable doubt.

A serious contribution to this debate requires the admission that the cosmological redshift according to Hubble's law (1) is the SOLE experimentally measured quantity in contemporary cosmology.

More particularly, the sole measured quantity is the observed wavelength of galactic light λobserved (or equivalently, its corresponding frequency), from which the cosmological redshift z is uniquely and unambiguously derived via law (1) via known values of the emitted wavelength of galactic light. The cosmological redshift therefore characterized by the decrease (increase) of the wavelength (frequency) of galactic light.

The totality of the numerous additional "experimental values" present in the 20th century cosmology, such as the chained speed of recession of galaxies, ARE NOT measured, but are DERIVED from Hubble's law (1) via one or more experimentally unverified CONJECTURES. ZeusSon.

I believe that the conjecture of the expansion of the universe was somewhat justified in the earlier part of the 20th century. However, the advent of never enging conjectures following conjectures, each one proved to be inconsistent, has rendered very deplorable the continued support of the expansion of the universe just because verifying special reelativity without without the joint study of a structural revisions in cosmology. Nsg39fk

YES Nsg39fk, I agree with you fully. ZeusSon

What is the most dominant aspect for a new age in cosmology? Cjr02;y

The most dominant point is the admission of the vast experimental evidence accumulated on Earth that Einstein's special relativity, while being exactly valid in vacuum per Einstein's conception, is inapplicable within physical media at large, including inter-galactiuc and inner-galactic gaseous media (Part II), in favor of Santilli's covering isorelativity and related isocosmology (Part III). ZeusSon

I would like to thank the R. M. Santilli Foundation for bringing to my attention this important website since I was basically unaware of the scams going on in cosmology. What a colossal adulteration of scientific evidence to maintain Einstein's theories against Einstein;s will !! Vgd73py

Modern cosmology is based on an analogous application of the Doppler principle, established for "sound", to the observed fact of "redshift of light" emitted by distant objects, which redshift is interpreted as if the light source would really recede from the observer. But the Doppler effect for "sound" is a "relative" phenomenon. That is, an observer's impression that the frequency of an approaching signal would change when the source of the signal passes and recedes from her, is a relative impression only. It is as relative, as the daily observation of the Sun orbiting the earth is relative to the observer only. As a matter of fact the signal's frequency doesn't really change when the source recedes from the observer, the Sun doesn't really orbit the earth, and, by analogy, the redshift of light emitted from a distant source doesn't really indicate that the source is receding. That's all. And, this alone destroys all of modern cosmology. Dwe97oo

Thank you Dwe97oo for your beautiful return to sanity in [89] expressed with your real name we cannot release to protect you from the sharks' out there in academia whose sole intent is the manipulatgion of knowledge for their evil interests. DemocritusSon

RUNII: No SUSY, No WIMP, No HIGGS, No HEW PHYSICS? http://vixra.org/pdf/1801.0340v1.pdf , Fundamental physics is frustrating physicists Fundamental physics is frustrating physicists. "Whether politicians and taxpayers will be up for this remains to be seen. That fundamental physics has got as far as it has is, essentially, a legacy of its delivery to political leaders of the mid-20th century of the atom and hydrogen bombs. The consequence of this was that physicists were able to ask for expensive toys-for who knew what else they might come up with. That legacy has now been spent, though, and any privilege physics once had has evaporated. This risks leaving in permanent limbo not only the GUTs and their brethren, but also the sceptical idea of Dr Hossenfelder that the Standard Model really is all there is. And that would surely be the most depressing result of all."? Bds23ui

Thank you ds23ui for another beautiful return to sanity in [89] expressed with your real name we cannot release to protect you from the sharks out there in academia whose sole intent is the manipoulkationb of knowledge for their evil interests. DemocritusSon

.

EDITORIAL NOTE: We solicit historical contributions on Hubble's original formulation of his law (1).

I.2. The conjecture of the expansion of the universe.

The first interpretation of Hubble's law (1) (among others reviewed in Part II) is that the cosmological redshift is due to the motion of galaxies away from us according to the Doppler effect, which is a basic axiom of Einstein special relativity [4], thus resulting in the conjecture that the universe is expanding. A simple use of special relativity implies that the cosmological redshift is proportional (in first approximation) to the speed v of the considered galaxy, resulting in the conjecture

z = H'd ≈ v/c,    (2)

or Hd.c = v/c, resulting in the assumption v = Hd.

Figure I.1: Picture of a sculpture in the hall of the Vinoy Renaissance Hotel in St. Petersburg, Florida, illustrating the expansion of the universe according to conjecture (3), thus showing Earth at the center of the universe and galaxies moving away from Earth in all is "radial" directions.

Conjecture (2) remained dormant for decades until the Hiroshima explosion of August 1945 propelled Albert Einstein to a justly historical fame due to the confirmation by said explosion of his celebrated law E = mc2. At that point, the physicists of the Manhattan project [5] and their academic associates initiated a world wide promotion of the conjecture on the expansion of the universe for the unspoken, yet evident intent of maintaining the validity of Einstein's special relativity in the larger scale structure of the universe, which promotion has essentially been continued on a world wide basis to this day. ZeusSon.

I do not understand the case here treated because the speed of recession of galaxies moving away from us is measured and, therefore, it is beyond doubt. Zsgt96lg

NO.There is no possibility whatsoever for us to measure the seed "v" of galaxies. The sole and only thing we measure is the cosmological redshift of galactic light, namely, we measure the value of "z" in Eq.()1). The speed "v" of receiding galaxies is a CONJECTURE disproved by conceptual, geometric and experimental evidence reviewed in this blog. ZeusSon

Your claim that the expansion of the universe implies Earth at the center of the universe is wrong because the space in between galaxies is expanding everywhere in the universe.

NO. Even assuming the hyperbolic assumption of the expansion of space (which was voiced to avoid Earth at the center of the unievrse, as it is well known....) Earth remains at the center of a hypothetical expanding space because of the conjecture of the acceleration of the expansion, see, section I.6 below. ZeusSon

It is absolutely astonishing to see that Einstein's fanatics have managed to brain wash thousands of physicists for one century on the expansion of the universe by avoiding the radial character of the believed expansion!. Since this radial character is evident and well known by experts, do we have here a one century long conspiracy? Chft37ot

YES, you are right but Prof. Santilli has reviewed the rejection of the expansion of the universe byEinstein, Hoyle, Hubble, Zwicky, fermi et al and proved their view correct with advanced mathematical, theoretical and experimental research over decades. ZeusSon

I cannot understand how qualified physics professors (including Nobel laureates....) can ignore the ongoing return to the Middle Ages with Earth at the center of the universe since it is so evident from the radial character of the Hubble law an build on it a Babel tower of hyperbolic hypothesis, since we are dealing with physicists who are either ignorant, or corrupt. Ls92gf

We never say that the earth is at the center of our Universe, but at the center of the observable universe. Nobody know the size of the universe. Sww55qq

Sww55qq, either you are naive or you are a member of the organized scientific ring that pushed to accept this plethora of hyperbolic conjectures for one full century by discrediting qualified dissident view without argument and abusing billions of dollars of taxpayer money. It is irrelevant wheteitherher you did or did not say it. According to Einstein, Hoyle, Hubble, Zwicky, Fermi et al, HUBBLE'S LAW IMPLIES EARTH'S AT THE CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE DUE TO ITS RADIA CHARACTER. STOP THE PROPAGANDA. And, for your own face do nog try to resolve this return to the Middle Ages with the ultra far fetched hyperbolic conjecture that something totally unknown, space, is expanding!!! ZeusSon

Modern cosmology is based on an analogous application of the Doppler principle, established for "sound", to the observed fact of "redshift of light" emitted by distant objects, which redshift is interpreted as if the light source would really recede from the observer. But the Doppler effect for "sound" is a "relative" phenomenon. That is, an observer's impression that the frequency of an approaching signal would change when the source of the signal passes and recedes from her, is a relative impression only. It is as relative, as the daily observation of the Sun orbiting the earth is relative to the observer only. As a matter of fact the signal's frequency doesn't really change when the source recedes from the observer, the Sun doesn't really orbit the earth, and, by analogy, the redshift of light emitted from a distant source doesn't really indicate that the source is receding. That's all. And, this alone destroys all of modern cosmology. Dwe97oo

Thank you Dwe97oo for your beautiful return to sanity in [89] expressed with your real name we cannot release to protect you from the sharks' out there in academia whose sole intent is the manipulatgion of knowledge for their evil interests. DemocritusSon

RUNII: No SUSY, No WIMP, No HIGGS, No HEW PHYSICS? http://vixra.org/pdf/1801.0340v1.pdf , Fundamental physics is frustrating physicists Fundamental physics is frustrating physicists. "Whether politicians and taxpayers will be up for this remains to be seen. That fundamental physics has got as far as it has is, essentially, a legacy of its delivery to political leaders of the mid-20th century of the atom and hydrogen bombs. The consequence of this was that physicists were able to ask for expensive toys-for who knew what else they might come up with. That legacy has now been spent, though, and any privilege physics once had has evaporated. This risks leaving in permanent limbo not only the GUTs and their brethren, but also the sceptical idea of Dr Hossenfelder that the Standard Model really is all there is. And that would surely be the most depressing result of all."? Bds23ui

Thank you ds23ui for another beautiful return to sanity in [89] expressed with your real name we cannot release to protect you from the sharks out there in academia whose sole intent is the manipoulkationb of knowledge for their evil interests. DemocritusSon

. I fail to see why (2) puts the earth at the center of the universe. Remember v is a relative speed with respect to the observer. In our case earth. But observers on any galaxy, say the Tadpole galaxy in the dragon, would make the same observation, and (2) would apply to them too. Few12po

Hello Few12po thank you for your view and for the respectful language. Unfortunately allow me to indicate in your interest that you appear to be brainwashed by the politics at Wikipedia where every word is carefully manipulated to achieve compatibility with Einstein. To be compatible with the Hubble law (1), the hypothetical speed "v" of Eq. (2) "must" be same for all galaxies at the same distance "d" from hearth IN ALL RADIAL DIRECTIONS FROM EARTH (this is the part intentionally suppressed at Wikipedia because its editors known it well), thus implying Earth at the center of the universe as explained in details in the text. For your independence of thought, you should also consider the fact that such a recession speed is totally hypothetical because the same experimentally measured quantity is the redshift "z" (another thing carefully suppressed at Wikipedia), and that, as discussed in detail in Part II, vast experiments conducted on Earth (Santilli isoredshift, also carefully and intentionally ignored at Wikipedia) disprove the expansion of the universe. Additionally, you should mediate a moment on the fact that the conjecture of the expansion of the universe has a political motivation - impose Einstein;s theories in the universe - against the will of Einstein himself, Hoyle, Hoyle, etc., etc.; it was studiously conceived not to be verifiable on Earth so that it can be imposed via organized propaganda; and the ideal that this enormous number of galaxies and all their stars have to move is at a fraction of "c" to have an appreciable redshift (yet another thing carefully and intentionally unmentioned in Wikipedia, what and anti-scientific website!!!) at is grossly implausible.Let's return to the teaching by Galileo and Santilli that cosmological models have to be based on experiments first conducted on Earth.. DemocritusSon

EDITORIAL NOTE: We solicit contributions on the early assumptions of the expansion of the universe and build on such evdience a Babela tower of inconsistent conjectures because we are dealing with people who are either ignorant, or naive or corrupt.

I.3. The return to the Middle Ages with Earth at the center of the universe

As it is well known to serious historians, Albert Einstein, Edwin Hubble, Fred Hoyle, Fritz Zwicky, Enrico Fermi, Louis de Broglie, and other famous scientists died without accepting the conjecture of the expansion of the universe because, as a necessary condition to verify Hubble's law (1), the speed v of receding galaxies must be the same for all galaxies at the same distance d from Earth in all radial directions from Earth, thus implying the return to the Middle Ages with Earth at the center of the universe. Such a consequence persists under all six additional cosmological conjectures, such as that of the expansion of space itself as shown below.

As anybody can see via simple internet searches on the Hubble law (see, e.g., Wikipedia [6] and scientific papers quoted therein), the return to the Middle Ages is avoided in the 20th century cosmology via the studious misrepresentation of Hubble's law (1) in the MEASURED WAVELENGTHS of galactic light (1) into the purely conjectural assumption on the SPEED of galaxies WITHOUT the crucial dependence on the RADIAL DISTANCE d of the galaxies from Earth of law (2). ZeusSon.

= z ≈ v/c.    (3)

In other words, Earth at the center of the universe, which is evident in expression (2) is avoided in assumption (3) via the studious suppression of the dependence on the radial distance d. Once law (1) is twisted into law (3), the historical credibility of Hubble's law is abused to claim that the assumed galactic speeds v are "measured," resulting in an obscurantism of historical proportions, with ensuing serious problems of scientific ethics and accountability and the apparent misuse of hundreds of millions of taxpayers money which is continuing to this day in a totally unchecked way.

Figure I.2: We reproduce a picture from Wikipedia [7] showing the funnel-shaped geometry of the expanding universe in which the symmetry axis represents the value of the speed while the sectional plane represents the distance of the galaxies from Earth, thus confirming the disguised use of law (2) The additional unreassuring point is that the picture is presented in [7] WITHOUT stating that Earth must necessarily be at the tip of the funnel, that is, at the center of the universe, thus confirming a century old obscurantism of historical proportions.

Figure 2 refers to a claimed acceleration which is constant in time. It should be indicated that the second conjecture of an acceleration increasing in time [8] implies a more complex funnel-type geometry identified in Ref. [6] but again, without the indication that Earth must be at the initiation of the funnel, thus being at the center of the universe, by therefore confirming a century-old obscurantism in cosmology of historical proportions. ZeusSon.

The century-old twisting of the measurement of the cosmological redshift into the hyperbolic measurement of the receding speed of galaxies is shameful and a colossal blunder with the abase of over one billion dollar of taxpayer money. Qre00al

Modern cosmology is based on an analogous application of the Doppler principle, established for "sound", to the observed fact of "redshift of light" emitted by distant objects, which redshift is interpreted as if the light source would really recede from the observer. But the Doppler effect for "sound" is a "relative" phenomenon. That is, an observer's impression that the frequency of an approaching signal would change when the source of the signal passes and recedes from her, is a relative impression only. It is as relative, as the daily observation of the Sun orbiting the earth is relative to the observer only. As a matter of fact the signal's frequency doesn't really change when the source recedes from the observer, the Sun doesn't really orbit the earth, and, by analogy, the redshift of light emitted from a distant source doesn't really indicate that the source is receding. That's all. And, this alone destroys all of modern cosmology. Dwe97oo

Thank you Dwe97oo for your beautiful return to sanity in [89] expressed with your real name we cannot release to protect you from the sharks' out there in academia whose sole intent is the manipulatgion of knowledge for their evil interests. DemocritusSon

RUNII: No SUSY, No WIMP, No HIGGS, No HEW PHYSICS? http://vixra.org/pdf/1801.0340v1.pdf , Fundamental physics is frustrating physicists Fundamental physics is frustrating physicists. "Whether politicians and taxpayers will be up for this remains to be seen. That fundamental physics has got as far as it has is, essentially, a legacy of its delivery to political leaders of the mid-20th century of the atom and hydrogen bombs. The consequence of this was that physicists were able to ask for expensive toys-for who knew what else they might come up with. That legacy has now been spent, though, and any privilege physics once had has evaporated. This risks leaving in permanent limbo not only the GUTs and their brethren, but also the sceptical idea of Dr Hossenfelder that the Standard Model really is all there is. And that would surely be the most depressing result of all."? Bds23ui

Thank you ds23ui for another beautiful return to sanity in [89] expressed with your real name we cannot release to protect you from the sharks out there in academia whose sole intent is the manipoulkationb of knowledge for their evil interests. DemocritusSon

.

EDITORIAL NOTE: We solicit contributions disproving that the expansion of the universe implies Earth at its center..

I.4. Geometric inconsistency of the expansion of the universe.

In addition to the return to the Middle Ages with Earth at the center of the universe, an additional objection against the expansion of the universe is that conjecture (3) implies relative speeds among galaxies having different values for different observers, with ensuing catastrophic geometric inconsistency of conjecture [18-44].

Figure I.3: The diagram of this figure provides a geometric representation of the expansion of the universe showing galaxy G1 at a distance d1 from Earth E which is double the distance d2 of galaxy G2, thus implying a relative an acceleration between said galaxies since v1 = 2 v2. However, there exist an infinite number of observers in the universe for which galaxies G1 and G2 are at the same distance, such as observer G, with consequential lack of relative acceleration and ensuing catastrophic inconsistency of conjecture (3).

It is unfortunately for human knowledge, the Wikipoedia-academic complex continues to ignore the catastrophic inconsistencies depicted in Figures 2 and 3 despite their publication in refereed scientific journals [17-44] and their large propagation in international conferences, interviews and world wide PRWeb Releases [2], thus confirming the existence of serious problems of scientific ethics and accountability in cosmology. ZeusSon.

Prof. Santilli;s geometric inconsistency of the expansion of the universe is indeed correct. In fact, the diagram of Figure I3 can be re-expressed as follows

Galaxies G1 and G2 are at double distance from Earth E. Then G2 should have double the speed G1 with respect to E. However, the vertical line intersecting half way the distance between G1 and G2 identified an infinite number of observers ) for which G1 and G2 are at the same distance, thus disproving the belief on the expansion of the universe. The inconsistency remains valid under the expansion of space itself due top the believed acceleration of the expansion, thus confirming that current cosmology is a century-old scam to use special relativity where it does not belong. Bfa-4hg

The premise of the expansion and of the acceleration of the expansion is that G1 is accelerating away from E faster than G2, they do this after compensating for the time distance of G1 being greater and so adjusting the true position due to the lightspeed time lag at a given time. The analogy used is a rubber balloon filled with a gas and the pressure outside of the balloon is reduced, so the volume of the ba...Dsw43ow

EDITORIAL NOTE: this emssage has been ingterrupted because based on an excesisve number of hypothetical assumptions under which anything can be prived.

Editorial NOTE: We solicit contributions disproving the catastrophic inconsistency of Figure 3.

I.5. Inconsistencies of the big bang conjecture.

With the passing of time, there was an increase of the objections against Conjecture I on the expansion of the universe, and Conjecture II on the accelerate of the expansion. Rather than admitting the inconsistencies, orthodox physicists decided to introduce a third conjecture aimed at the support of the preceding ones for the unspoken, yet evident intent of maintaining the validity of Einstein special relativity in cosmology.

This scientific scene led to the formulation of Conjecture III, known as the big bang [9], according to which the universe originated from a primordial explosion occurred some 14.7 billion years ago, which explosion would "explain" the expansion of the universe. Unfortunately for the credibility of orthodox physicists, Conjecture III is equally afflicted by numerous inconsistencies published in refereed journals (see Refs. [18-44] and papers quoted therein), such as:

1. As a necessary condition to comply with the measured cosmological redshifts (1), the big bang must have occurred in our galactic vicinity, thus implying again the return to the Middle Ages with Earth at the center of the universe.

2. By the very definition of an "explosion" (see the Webster Dictionary), there should not be no galaxy around Earth for 14.7 billion light years, contrary to a rather uniform distribution of galaxies in the universe.

3. The "debris" of an explosion (in our case, the galaxies) should slow down with the distance contrary to conjecture (3).

4. There is no possibility whatsoever that a primordial explosion can explain the increase of the claimed speeds of galaxies with the increase of the distance.

5. The big bang conjecture merely shifted the unknown origin of the expansion of the universe into the unknown origin of big bang itself; and other inconsistencies.

Figure I.4: A conceptual rendering of Conjecture III on the big bang [9]. The mere comparison of such a view with measured values (1) confirms the necessity for Earth being at the center of the universe, as well as the impossibility for the big bang conjecture to provide a consistent "explanation" of the expansion of the universe for which it was proffered. Note that, a primordial explosion cannot represent the current, rather regular distributions of galaxies unless the big bang was a kind of a slow kind of expansion far from any explosion.

Supporters of the validity of Einstein's special relativity in cosmology claim that the cosmic background radiation [10] is an "experimental evidence" on the existence of the big bang [10]. In reality, one of Prof. Santilli's graduate students when he was at Harvard University proved that, in the event the cosmic background radiation originated 14.7 billions years ago, it should have been completely absorbed by galaxies and the inter-galactic medium over five billion years ago due to its weakness. This occurrence establishes the need for a continuous source of energy to maintain the cosmic background radiation whose origin is identified in Part II.

Unfortunately for the credibility of the Wikipedia-academic complex, none of the above inconsistencies are mentioned in the orthodox literature, while the quotation of opposing experimental papers such as Refs. [18-44], not only has been opposed for decades by Wikipedia, but actually discredited without any counter-experiment with dubbing such as "fringe science" [16], thus confirming problems of scientific ethics and accountability. ZeusSon.

There is a rather simple conceptual inconsistency with the notion of 'expansion' of the universe in the aftermath of a 'Big Bang'. The original (unexplained) 'explosion' (i.e. the 'Big Bang') as well as the allegedly imminent expansion of the universe both require a physical (!) space to pre-exist for the (space of the) universe to expand into. A further problem arises with the question of the dimensions of such a required pre-existing space. Any spatial dimension higher than 3 won't work since a (n-x)-dimensional space can't expand into a n-dim space for the reason a (n-x)-dim space can't be and never is a part (!) of a n-dim space. To better understand this fact one has to look at the matter from a mereological or mereotopological point of view. It's rather simple, if one understands that a line impossibly can consist of points and a plane impossibly can consist of lines, a fact which also relates to any edges of the respective higher dim 'spaces'. If then the pre-existing space is a 3-dim physical space, too, then there isn't any expansion of the (space) of the Big Bang originated Universe given, since the space already is (probably infinitely) 'expanded'. Jee66ii

I am a former graduate student at the Lyman Laboratory of Physics of Harvard University. I remember vividly that in spring 1979 R. M. Santilli (who was there as well) indicated quite clearly to S. Weinberg, (then at HU) the inconsistencies of the big bang conjecture, which have been reviewed in this blog. Weinberg responded with his usual arrogance without serious counter-arguments. Subsequently Weinberg became one of the biggest proponents of the big bang conjecture by completely ignoring Santilli's serious objections. Despite the passing of decades, I remain shocked at fact that a Nobel Laureate such as Weinberg could ignore these serious objections to pursue his exploitation of p[physics for his own ego. Every word stated by Santilli in 'Il Grande Grido' [86] is true and documented in any case. Xsa83kk

What is the definition of 'fake science'? Nas99ts

I am not a linguistic expert, but I believe that a definition of "fake science' should be the intentional, generally organized adulteration of physical evidence to pursue unethical and scientific interests. ZeusSon

Stephen Hawking himsel fhas changed his big bang theory.Now, he affirms that the Universe is not born from a singularity but from a finite size and preceded by a big crunch.I think that expansion of Universe could be possible. Why not! There are so much theories about the Universe and on its live. Certainly one of them could be correct!!.I am open to every theory! My opinion is tha twe cannot measure the actual red shift of distant galaxies. The measurement we do on these galaxies is very old and comes from the early beginning of Universe and saying that the redshift we measure now is the actual red shift is a great error. The acceleration of Universe expansion, is the derivative of the speed of expansion and we know that the derivative operation is very noisy (source of errors). So, how can we do a measurement of acceleration if we do not know the real and actual speed of expansion? Somebody can give me an answer to this question?Vre23pr/p>

With his academic position, Stephen Hawking could have written several pages of serious new physics. Unfortunately for him, he is an Einstein fanatics and, therefore, all his thinking is adapted to Einstein theories where they no longer belong. In fact, Hawking's original cosmological views and their current little revisions are based on the untold, but evident aim of verifying special and general relativities in interior physical conditions, such as black holes, big or small big bang, neutron stars, etc., in which conditions their inapplicability is simply incontrovertible on serious scientific grounds outside the politics on Einstein. This has been a loss for Science and Hawking. Your personal belief that the universe could be expanding is disproved by a plethora of inconsistencies and experimental disproofs. I suggest you should study for your own face from Parts I and II of this website and, above all, from the quoted refereed publications. Careful that their serious dismissal will requires credible counter-experiment in which absence you may be accused of corruption. Please contact us again after you have acquired all the necessary mathematical., theoretical; and experimental knowledge. DemocritusSon

The age of Universe is 14Mia years and we measure galaxies distant of more than 13Mia light years. That means that, at least at some instant, the speed of expansion was greater than c (in fact, accordingly to physicists, 100 to 1000c). It is not incompatible with Einstein theory because it is not the space which is stretching but the space time itself.So, we could accept the idea that the distant galaxies are mooving more speedy than c!!. Zwe76oi

Thank you Zwe76oi, thank you for your serious contribution, the first I have seen in a while.\ In fact, your point provides visible evidence on the farfetched character of the big bang, the expansion of space and the like because it establishes that the universe was fully formed and operational 13 billion years ago. Additional detections have apparently established galaxies in full existence billions of years BEFORE the claimed big bang ! Their publication has been rejected by the APS as they did reject years ago astrophysical measurements of speeds in the universe bigger than c. Academic astrophysicists know all this, of course, but they keep supporting the big bang because it verifies Einstein theories.My God, how low has plumbed our scientific ethics! DemocritusSon.

EDITORIAL NOTE: We solicit contributions disproving the inconsistencies of the big bang conjecture.

I.6. Inconsistencies of the hyperbolic conjecture that space itself is expanding.

With the passing of time, there was an increase of the rejections by qualified scholars of the Conjectures I, II and III due to their manifest inconsistencies. Rather than admitting them and promoting a new era in cosmology, perhaps banking on the world wide support by their fellows, orthodox physicists decided to promote a fourth conjecture, again aimed at the support of the preceding three failed conjectures studiously conceived to maintain Einstein's special relativity in cosmology in a way not to be experimentally verifiable.

The situation became truly embarrassing for Einstein followers because the Hubble telescope established the existence of galaxies at the edge of the visible universe whose cosmological redshift was so big to require billions of galaxies traveling at speeds bigger that of light, thus being in flagrant violation of special relativity for which validity all conjectures had been ventured.

This scenario lead orthodox physicists to formulate the truly hyperbolic Conjecture IV according to which galaxies are now moving because space itself is expanding [7]. What is simply astonishing is the fact that such a hyperbolic conjecture was ventured and supported world wide by orthodox physicists without any explanation whatsoever of what is space, how the enormous entirety of space could expand and if so, how it could possibly carry along trillions and trillions of galaxies.

The problem for the credibility of organized orthodox followers of Einstein is that the expansion of space itself, besides failed to provide any "scientific" representation (that is quantitative with equations) of the expansion of the universe, is afflicted by the same inconsistencies of the preceding four conjectures, as illustrated in Figure 5.

Figure I.5: The hyperbolic fourth conjecture on the expansion of space itself [7] was specifically voiced to avoid the return to the Middle Ages with Earth at the center of the universe that are unavoidable for the preceding Conjectures I, II, and III, as well as to avoid the violation of special relativity established by created by astrophysical measurements via the Hubble telescopes according to which billions of galaxies at the edge of the known universe have such a cosmological redshift to require their traveling at speeds much bigger than the speed of light. In a rather incredible and naive way, the hyperbolic conjecture of the expansion of space itself is generally illustrated with the inflation of the ballon in this figure. The problem for organized Einstein followers is that the inflation of balloons "does not" represent in a consistent way the expansion of the universe, as one can easily see by noting that the acceleration of the expansion with the distance would require an extremely complex, hitherto unknown geometry far from they simplistic inflation of balloons.

Particularly embarrassing for orthodox physicists is the failure to represent the acceleration of the expansion with an expanding space because, in this case, the expansion should follow a truly hyperbolic geometry essentially adapted to each galaxy under observation. What is most unreassuring is the complete silence on the physical origin of the claimed expansion of the immensity of space [7].

To have an idea of the lack of any serious scientific process, one should know that, to propagate light at 200,000 Km/sec, space (or the universal substratum) is expansion has such a density that one cubic centimeter of space should contain more energy than that contained in the entire Sun. The energy needed for the expansion of a space with such a density would be so immensely large to be a large multiple of the universe itself. Therefore, Conjecture IV on the expansion of space itself is so hyperbolic and scientifically unfounded to multiply pre-existing problems of scientific ethics and accountability to such dimension to create a true scientific obscurantism of hysteric proportions. ZeusSon.

Our Universe, or its tissue, is stretched like a gaz in free expansion. The maximum distance we can see is 13 Mia light years due to light speed. But, a guy on an other planet in an other galaxy sees also at the same distance and so, he can suppose that he is at the center of the Universe. In fact, he is at the center of its visible Universe. It is the same thing for every body in all galaxies of our Universe. Otr93gf

Otr93gf, somebody should tell you that your view of the universe is extremely farfetched, launched by Einstein fanatic for unethical aims, without a shadow of physical content, and with a vast array of inconsistencies and experimental disproofs you completely ignore and do dot even care to counter. More sinister is the origin of the political fancy of the expansion of what? (space? what is space?? because it was voiced by an organized ring to avoid Earth at the center of the universe which is implied by Hubble's law. Hence, to keep Einstein's theories in cosmology. So your political fancy is a failed organized scientific scheme hailed to resolve a preceding failed organized scheme by Einstein fanatics. You look likely one of them. It is because of p[people like you that Americans have requested the intervention of the Attorney General to peek into the abuse of taxpayer money in these unethical fancies. Check it out to see whether you are in the list of investigated guys.Demopstrituson

You are a bunch of crackpots. The expansion of space must be represented with the expansion of a gas and not of balloons. How can you expect to be believed when the expansion of space is supported by famous professoprs of physics at Berkeley, Harvard,. MIT, Princeton, Cornell and otjer leading university the world over? Vew29hg

Vew29hg, either you are incredibly gullible or you are a member of this world wide organized ring of famous professors. The diagrams of Section 1.4 illustrating the catastrophic inconsistencies of the conjecture of the expansion of the universe apply fully to the expansion of space or of the universe as a "gas: and lead to the same conclusions. To see that, you draw a radial line from Earth in this expanding "gas." Then, as a necessary condition to verify experimental measurements, those of the cosmological redshift, Galaxy G2 must have double speed with respect to G1. But this must occur in all RADIAL directions from Earth. Hence, to verify data, this hyperbolic "gas" of billion trillion galaxies (my God!) must expand in a very crooked way, with radial accelerations from Earth, thus implying again the return to the Middle Ages with Earth at the center of the universe.
Let's see the documented history of what has been done, first by their ancestors, and now by this organized fringe of professors:
1) The organization in the early 20th century of the control of cosmology via Einstein's special relativity,, which control was implemented via the representation of the cosmological redshift via the Doppler axiom with consequential expansion o0f the universe;
2) The organized discreditation of all qualified opposite views including (see also Parts II and III): the discreditation pog Zwicky's hypothesis of Tired light continuing to this day (see Wikipedia [17[), the discreditation of Harvard's professor Halton Arp for his experimental discovery of quasars physically connected to a galaxy while having dramatically different cosmological redshift; the discreditation of the former Harvard scientists Ruggero Santilli because of his surpassing of Einstein's theories you can see in book [86], his page at Wikipedia as well as in the vulgar defamations you can see in the internet; etc.
3) Since an expanding universe needs some kind of explanation, the same ring came out with the conjecture of the big bang for the untold but continued intent to maintain Einstein's theories in cosmology;
4) To avoid the return to the Middle Ages with Earth at the center of the universe which is inherent in the expansion of the universe and the big bang, the same ring came out with a coordinated world wide propaganda of the hyperbolic conjecture that space itself is expanding;
5) Since the ring is composed by experts in cosmology, including Nobel laureates in cosm0logy, they knew well that the hyperbolic expansion of space continue to imply Earth at the center of the universe due to the hyperbolic acceleration of the expansion. Rather than admitting the incontrovertible evidence on the inapplicability of Einstein's theories within the inter-galactic and inner-galactic media, the same ring came out with the additional hyperbolic conjectures that the universe is filled up of mysterious invisible and totally transparent things such as the dark matter and the dark energy;
5) Since dark matter and dark energies have been disproved by astrophysical evidence (see Sections I.8 and I.9), again, rather than admitting inapplicability of Einstein's theories in cosmology and promoting a new era in cosmology, the same ring has elected to continued the chain of scams with the novel conjectures that darkl matter and dark energies are composed by mysterious invisible, thus non-detectable (my God!) particles such as the 'darkalino' (also called the 'coccolino') etc,;etc.
6) The dishonest of this ring is easily established by their double standard, fully reflected in Wikipedia, because evidence establishing the inapplicability of Einstein's theories in cosmology is treated in an incredibly harsh way, while the most far fetched and hyperbolic conjectures are hailed the world over as science whenever they verify Einstein's theories;
7) Since, following one century of organized scams, this scandalous situation in cosmology cannot be allowed to keep going for ever, we are told that the Attorney general has been called in to make sure that, following the misuse and abuse of billions ofg dollars, no additional taxpayer money is used by the ring and its followers. DemocritusSon

The caption of figure 3 talks about acceleration, which is completely irrelevant to this discussion. But just draw this figure on a balloon, and slowly blow some more air into it. You'll see no inconsistencies. While observer G sees G1 and G2 moving away from him at the same speed, he can calculate from that how fast G1 and G2 are moving away from each other. No inconsistency at all! Gds34op

Gds34op, either you are wrong in good faith or you are a very smart member of the organized interests on Einstein trying to derail attention from the undesired meat of things. The hypothetical acceleration of the hypothetical expansion of the universe has indeed everything to do because it cuts completely out of reality your reduction of the complexity of the universe to your little balloons, In fact, you have to admit for that such an acceleration cannot be represented with a progressive inflation of your little balloons because the only consistent representation of this ultra hypothetical expansion of the universe with accelerations nonlinearly increasing with the distance is given by the funnel geometry which is clearly identified in the text (but you intentionally ignored)

,p> in which case Earth must necessarily be at the tip of the funnel as a necessary condition to verify reality, Hubble's law (1), , thus again Earth the center of the universe. That;s what appears to bother you: the uncovering of the fake character of 20th century cosmology. The tragedy for your and your ring is that, due to one century of unchallenged c control, you do not realize that such a control is over, that it is time to return to sanity [89], and that attempts such as yours at continuing the manipulation of science via fake arguments expressed in pompous ways are extremely self-damaging for your ring. . DemocritusSon

EDITORIAL NOTE: We solicit contributions disproving the catastrophic inconsistencies indicated in this section.

I.7. Inconsistencies of the conjecture of cosmological inflation.

With the passing of time, there was an increase of the number of rejections of the cosmological Conjectures I, II, III, and IV because each conjecture failed to resolve the inconsistencies of the preceding one, thus creating serious doubts on the main objective, that is, the validity of special relativity in the large scale structure of the universe. Rather than admitting the experimentally established "inapplicability" of the latter theory in cosmology (see Part II), Einstein followers continued in their chain of sequential conjectures by using, this time, authority of Einstein general relativity.

This scenario led to Conjecture V known as cosmological inflation, which reexamines the failed big bang for very short and very large periods of times following the claimed original explosion [11]. Rather than achieving the intended aim, the introduction of general relativity caused additional losses of credibility of the Wikipedia-academic complex for numerous reasons.

In fact, for extremely short periods of time following the claimed explosion, where an intense gravitational field is expected, the use of general relativity causes a collapse of credibility [11] because general relativity is, without doubt, the most controversial theory of the 20th century, since the bending of star light is due to the refraction of light in the Sun chromosphere plus the conventional Newtonian contribution, without any evidence for the curvature of space, see Debate on General relativity. Lacking serious evidence on the curvature of space, Conjecture V becomes a kind of political scientific dogma.

Figure I.6: A conceptual rendering of the cosmological inflation [11] attempting to provide an "explanation" of the small and large scale structure of the big bang via Einstein's general relativity. Rather than achieving credibility, this cosmological conjecture has caused an increase of rejections because, in the small scale part space cannot be curved (see the Debate on General relativity) and in the large scale part space cannot be curved according to general relativity itself due to the extreme intergalactic distances, thus confirming the political character of the entire chain of contemporary cosmological conjectures.

Additionally, cosmic inflation is claimed to represent the large scale structure of the universe which is an abuse of Einstein's name because space is absolutely flat in the large scale structure of the universe due to the extreme mutual distances of the galaxies. It is simply astonishing that supporters of the cosmic inflation simply ignore these insufficiencies published in refereed journal, thus suggesting that they operate under an assumed impunity guaranteed by their orthodox colleagues the world over. ZeusSon

EDITORIAL NOTE: We solicit contributions, firstly, establishing the curvature of space via the disproof of its refraction in the Sun chromosphere and secondly, prove that intergalactic space is actually curved as a necessary condition to consider the use of general relativity under public research funds.

I.8. Inconsistencies of the conjecture of dark matter.

The use of Hubble telescope identified an additional problem for the chain of cosmological conjectures I, II, III, IV and V, given by the fact that the redshift of individual stars of a galaxy does not generally coincide with the redshift of the galaxy as a whole (see Figure 7 and Ref. [12]), an effect referred to as innergalactic redshift anomaly.

During the period of the detection of the indicated anomaly, a number of experimental papers were published establishing the lack of exact character of special relativity within atmosphere or chromosphere, thus establishing said inapplicability within the dense intergalactic gas which is visible in telescopes [18-44].

In this scenario, orthodox physicist proffered the additional Conjecture VI according to which galaxies are completely filled up by a mysterious substance called dark matter, that, following a world wide propaganda, flared up the imagination of a number of physicists, thus derailing the attention from the real physical issue, the inapplicability of special relativity within intergalactic gases which is assumed, via silence, to remain fully valid [11].

Unfortunately for the credibility of Wikipedia and its orthodox controllers, the conjecture of dark matter has provided to date no representation published in refereed journals of the innergalactic redshift anomaly for which it was proffered. In reality, papers in the scientific literature [2] proving that dark matter conjecture cannot represent said data, because due to its uniform distribution throughout a galaxy, its action on individual stars cancel out. In any case, a mere inspection of the data of Figure 7 clearly shows the impossibility of their representation via any uniformly distributed substance.

Figure I.7: The picture presents the measured value of the redshift of individual stars of a galaxy showing a rather dramatic departure from the redshift of the galaxy as a whole [44]. A sixth conjecture was launched for the interpretation of this anomaly, that of the dark matter permeating the entire galaxy, without any representation at all of the data here reported for which representation the conjecture was proffered and actually, the impossibility of their representation due to the assumed uniform distribution of the assumed mysterious substance.

Due to the failure of the conjecture of dark matter to represent the data it was intended for, one can see the continuation of the century old trend of attempting to salvage a failed conjecture via an additional conjecture. In fact, the orthodox physics community is already attempting the shift from a macroscopic to a microscopic level, by reducing dark matter to even more mysterious particles, such as the WIMP, the axion, the dark alino, etc., all with the above at the cost of hundreds of millions of taxpayers money [11].

Dark matter is a scam because it was introduced to represent internal galactic star, redshift anomalies but completely failed this task. The implications of dark matter at the level of the dynamics of stars and/or galaxies are simply hilarious because deprived of any physical content, see the recent Astrophysical evidence on the inconsistency of dark matter I agree with Prof. Santilli that dark matter was introduced to derail attention on the inapplicability of special relativity within the gas filling up galaxies whose admission allows indeed a quantitative representation of the anomalies (Part II) Cew77pe

Thank you. ZeusSon

More and more evidence is emerging against cold dark matter as it is conceived by current cosmological models (lambda-CDM), therefore more and more scientists are publicly questioning its existence. It may be worth to mention one of the last researches in this field, that can be found in the paper "A whirling plane of satellite galaxies around Centaurus A challenges cold dark matter cosmology", signed by astrophysicists and astronomers from renowned institutions, which concludes that systems of dwarf galaxies orbiting a bigger galaxy on an orderly thin plane (instead of random motion, as predicted by the standard model) are likely to be pretty common in the Universe, and behave in a way inconsistent with the presence of dark matter (that should make most of the mass of the galaxy itself, according to the standard model). The paper itself can be read at this link: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1802.00081.pdf Xsa564oy

Thank you, Xsa564oy. In fact, the scientific community is coming back more and more to its senses on this fake science, as you can also see also from the recent release https://news.uci.edu/2018/02/01/distant-galaxy-group-contradicts-common-cosmological-models-simulations/. However, you fail to mention the one and only quantitative representation of the anomalous redshift of individual galactic stars for which the sark matter sake was intended, that based on experiments on Earth, by Prof. Santilli, Ref. [40] http://www.thunder-energies.com/docs/dark-matter-2015.pdf I hope for your own sake that this omission is not due to the fact that Santilli numerically exact and time invariant representation of said anomalies requires the abandonment of special relativity within physical media in favor of the covering Santilli isorelativity [1]. ZeusSon

I believe that dark matter is a full "fake science" because orchestrated by an organized ruing of Einstein fanatics under Wikipedia and the APS support to keep Einstein where he does not belong, the gas in the interior of galaxies. Santilli;s exact rep[resonation of the anomalous redshift of individual stars compared to the redshift b of the galaxy as a whole http://www.thunder-energies.com/docs/dark-matter-2015.pdf is grossly mistreated by said organized ring currently in control of our science with our public money because requiring departures from SR within inter-galactic media in favor of covering theories. That;s simply shameful. Wyr96hp

Please explain to a non-expert how Prof. Santilli's isoshifts represent the experimental data of Figure I.7, and please explain why their representation is impossible with the hypothesis of dark matter. Thank you. Yre74pt

Yre74pt, thanks for your important inquiry. Prof. Santilli is the leading expert in the field. Here is the requested explanation to my best. The r cosmological redshift of individual galactic star is the result of the following main contributions:
INTERNAL ISOREDSHIFT FOR PERIPHERAL GALACTIC STARS
Galaxies are filled up by a cold gas in their peripheral regions Therefore, galactic stars in that region experience a first isoredshift caused by the propagation of their light according to Eq. (4) within that medium

Z1 = K1d1,

where d1 is the travel of light within said innergalactic medium. With the decrease of the distance from the galactic center, there is an increase of the density of the gas that implies an increase of the isoredshift precisely as expressed by the central-right part of Figure I.7. hence, 1 is a function of said density as well as of other data. INTERNAL ISOBLUESHIFT FOR CENTRAL GALACTIC STARS
In the vicinity of their center, galaxies are filled up of a dense gas at high temperature that, according to Santilli's isoshifts, causes an isoblueshift also according to law (4) and we shall write

Z2 = - K2d2

where K2 also depends of density and temperature and d2 is the distance covered by the light of the considered star in that medium.
EXTERNAL GALACTIC ISOREDSHIFT
After leaving the galaxy, star light propagates within the inter-galactic medium which is much thinner compared to the inner-galactic medium but, at very low temperature thus causing an isofredshift also according to law (4) that we write

z3 = + K3 d3,

where k3 is Santilli's constant for the innergalactic medium and d2 is the distance from the galaxy to us according to Hubble's law.
TOTAL GALACTIC ISOREDSHIFT
The total cosmological redshift for peripheral galactic stars is then given by

Zperal stars = + K1 d1 + K3 d3

in which the first term is essentially generally increasing with the decrease of the distance from the galactic center. By contrast, the total cosmological redshift for central galactic stars is given by

Zcenter stars = - K2d3 + K3d3

DOPPLER CONTRIBUTION?
Of course the above total isoshifts should be complemented with the conventional Doppler contribution in accordance with Santilli law ((4) and we have for perpheral stars

Zperal stars = + K1 d1 + K3 d3 + v/c

However, such a contribution is proportional to v/c and, as such, it is ignorable due to the implausibility that entire galaxies can move at relativistic speeds. The impossibility for the conjecture of dark matter to provide such a quantitative representation even in a minimal form should be excluded by any scientist with sanity of mind for countless reasons, for instance, because a uniformly distributed dark matter cannot have any impact on individual stars, in the event the distribution is adapted for one star you have inconsistencies for all other stars, etc.. These are some of the reasons dark matter is dubbed "fake science."JupiterSon

EDITORIAL NOTE: We solicit contributions by researchers on antimatter under public financial support to prove that the conjecture of dark matter represents indeed in a quantitative way (with equations) the innergalactic redshift anomalies.

I.9. Inconsistencies of the conjecture of dark energy.

Despite an intense propaganda on the preceding six conjectures, the conjecture of the expansion of the universe remained fundamentally inconsistent on conceptual, geometric and experimental grounds. Rather than admitting the failure of these conjectures, perhaps encouraged by the silence of the majority of the physics community, orthodox physicists continued in their century old posture, that of keep adding blatantly inconsistent conjectures in support of preceding inconsistent conjectures.

This scenario led to the formulation of Conjecture VII aimed at the "explanation" of the expansion of the universe via the conjecture that the universe is filled up by another mysterious substance called dark energy in such amount to constitute the great majority of the energy in the universe [13].

The collapse of the credibility by Wikipedia and its controllers is caused by the fact that, exactly as it was the case for dark matter, the conjecture of dark energy never achieved any quantitative representation of the expansion of the universe for which it was conceived for. As a matter of fact, there are papers published in refereed journals [2] proving that the conjecture of dark energy cannot represent the expansion of the universe, again because it is uniformly distributed, thus yielding a null total effect on galaxies.

Figure I.8: A pictorial view from Wikipedia [13] of the seventh conjecture of 20th century cosmology, that of the so-called dark energy which is believed to fill up the entire universe and represent the expansion of the universe. The loss of credibility by Wikipedia and its controllers is that such a task has been proved to be impossible, due to the uniform distributions of the second mysterious entity and other reasons, in various papers published in refereed journals whose citation in Wikipedia has been prohibited for decades.

It is particularly astonishing that, in their fervor to maintain special relativity in cosmology, the proposal of dark energy was made in complete oblivion of the work by Albert Einstein who established that energy is the source of gravitational "attraction," and certainly not "repulsion", the oblivion Einstein's failed attempts in changing the field equations of general relativity into a form admitting gravitational repulsion as need for the expansion of the universe, for which very reason Einstein died without accepting the conjecture of the expansion of the universe. ZeusSon.

EDITORIAL NOTE: We solicit contributions by orthodox physicists doing research in the field under public financial support to prove that the conjecture of dark energy does indeed represent the expansion of the universe for which it was proposed.

I.10. Conclusions

Readers unaware of the problems of ethics and accountability in the contemporary scientific community tend to approach cosmology with the expectation that science is established by papers published in refereed scientific journals, as it has been the case since the beginning of quantitative science.

Unfortunately for America, this century-old rule no longer applies because the only sciences considered for funding by the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy and other federal funding agencies are those presented in Wikipedia's so called 'Articles,' thus resulting in a serious shadow ion the image of American science in the world as well as in history

This explains the extreme hostility by Wikipedia against the quotation of serious criticisms of, let alone advances over Einstein's special and general relativities, as documented by the dabbing of works [16-44] as being "fringe science" [16]. The indicated condition also explains the opposition by Wikipedia, documented over decades, to quote refereed papers on the serious inconsistencies of the seven conjectures on the expansion of the universe. The pertinent question for Americans who really care for our Country is: For how long more should this this anti-American situation be tolerated? ZeusSon.

The most offensive aspect of the Wikipedia saga is the claim of 'Free' Encyclopedia while being the most politically controlled on record.

EDITORIAL NOTE: We solicit contributions proving that websites [9-17] verify Wikipedia rules.

PART II:
EXPERIENTIAL EVIDENCE ON THE LACK OF EXPANSION OF THE UNIVERSE AND RELATED CONJECTURES

II.1. Arp's pair of quasars and their associated galaxies.

The first experimental evidence on the lack of expansion of the universe was reached in the 1960's by the American astrophysicist at Harvard University, Halton Arp [48], with the discovery of quasars that are physically connected to galaxies according to clear gamma spectroscopic evidence, while their cosmological redshifts are dramatically different [46]. As it is the case for many other illustrious physicists (Section I.2) Halton Arp died in 2014, without accepting the expansion of the universe and the big bang.

Arp's discovery implies the lack of expansion of the universe because, according to special relativity, the quasars and their associated galaxies should have separated billions of years ago and moved away from each other at dramatically different speeds, while in reality said quasars and their associated galaxies are at rest with each other.

>p>Therefore, Arp's experimental discovery implies the inapplicability of Einstein's special relativity within the hyperdense quasar chromospheres and within intergalactic media, thus implying its inapplicability for the large scale structure of the universe due to the intergalactic media filling up the entire universe

In view of these implications, known orthodox physicists at Harvard University approached Arp, requesting that he should dismiss his discovery in a formal paper. Arp rejected such an unethical request; consequently, his position at Harvard was terminated; he was unable to locate an academic job anywhere in the USA; was forced to emigrate to Germany for an academic job at the Max Planck Institute; the treatment of his discovery was, and remains prohibited for consideration at international scientific meetings in cosmology under public financial support; and he was was prohibited access to an astrophysical laboratory anywhere in the world [47].

Figure II.1: One of Arp's pairs of quasars that are physically connected to corresponding galaxies according to gamma spectroscopic evidence quite visible in the above, picture, while the cosmological redshift of the quasar and that of its associated galaxies are dramatically different to such an extent that the cosmological redshift of the quasars are at time one hundred times that of the associated galaxy [46]. Arp's discovery constitutes the first experimental evidence on the lack of expansion of the universe and related conjectures because it implies the inapplicability of special relativity and related Doppler's effect within the chromosphere of quasars as well as within intergalactic gases and, consequently, within the intergalactic gas filling up the entire universe.

The treatment of Arp's discovery by the orthodox physics community constitutes a dark episode of American science in the world as well as in history. due to the discrediting of Arp's discovery via academic abuses without any serious technical argument. As indicated in Part I, everybody is entitled to his/her own opinion. Problem of scientific ethics and accountability emerge when such opinions are imposed under public financial support while discrediting opposing "experimental" evidence via organized abuse of unfortunate academic authority. Particularly unreassuring is the "review" of Arp's historical discovery in Wikipedia [48] due to the care in avoiding the identification of the inapplicability of Einstein special relativity within physical media, and the emphasis in "theories," rather than hard experimental measurements.ZeusSon

EDITORIAL NOTE: we solicit contributions in the field.

II.2. Zwicky's hypothesis of the 'Tired Light'.

In order to avoid the return to the Middle Ages with Earth at the center of the universe (which is implicit in the conjecture of the expansion of the universe, see Part I), the Swiss astrophysicist Fritz Zwicky [49] introduced in 1929 the hypothesis of tired light according to which light reaching us from far away galaxies loses energy to the intergalactic medium, (mostly composed of hydrogen).

In fact, the energy of light is given by E = hν, where h is Planck's constant and ν is the frequency. Therefore, the loss of energy E implies a decrease of the frequency (or an increase of the wavelength), with consequential redshift, in a way proportionate to the covering distance d. Consequently, Zwicky tired light provides a direct representation of the experimental measurements according to Hubble's law (1) without any intermediate conjecture)

Recall that the immutability of light is a central pillar of special relativity. Consequently, a main implication of Zwicky's tired light is that it implies the inapplicability of Einstein special relativity within physical media, such as the intergalactic medium and the consequential inapplicability in the large scale structure of the universe. As a consequence, Zwicky's hypothesis has been discredited for about one century, and it continues to be discredited to this day with dubbing such as that by Wikipedia [50] of being in the "fringes of astrophysics," while prohibiting the quotation in the same article [50] its experimental verification by Prof. Santilli review in Section II.3 below.

Figure II.2: The redness of Sunlight at Sunset is visual evidence of the validity of Zwicky's hypothesis [49] of tired light. The difference being Sunlight at Sunset and light from distant galaxies is that the travel of light in the former case is relatively short but within a medium of high comparative high density while the travel of light in the latter case occurs within a medium of very low density although for very long distances, thus implying the same physical law. In order to maintain the validity of special relativity within our atmosphere, and therefore dismiss Zwicky's hypothesis, orthodox physicists claim that said redness is not due to the redshift of blue light into red light, but it is due to absorption of blue light by our atmosphere. Such (a view is political because it is well known that red light is absorbed by our atmosphere even when the Sun is a the Zenith, as shown by the fact that the sky is blue rather than red). Therefore, red light cannot survive the 6,000 km travel in our atmosphere t the horizon. Hence, the claim that the redness of Sunlight at the horizon is due to the absorption of blue light is political when proffered by experts because it violates the well known physical laws according to which the absorption of light by a medium is proportional to the wavelength. Additional criticisms of Zwicky's hypothesis are equally political, such as is the claim that it would prevent far away galaxies from being seen by us, because such a criticism would identically apply to Hubble's law (1) as well as to the conjecture of the expansion of the universe.

The century-old discreditation of Zwicky's tired light without serious technical arguments is another serious damage to the image of American science in the word as well as in history because of its systematic occurrence throughout the orthodox academic world whenever dealing with experimental evidence violating Einstein's special relativity within physical media. To understand the gravity of the episode, the plausibility of Zwicky's hypothesis, and the easiness of its experimental verification on Earth, should be compared with the extreme implausibility of the cosmological conjectures preferred by orthodox physics, such as that of the expansion of space itself, as well as the impossibility for any experimental verifications on Earth. JupiterSon.

EDITORIAL NOTE: we solicit contributions in the field.

II.3. Santilli experimental confirmation of Zwicky's tired light

As a result of extensive mathematical, theoretical and experimental research over four decades [16-44], R. M. Santilli achieved systematic experimental confirmations on Earth that light does lose energy to cool media, thus confirming Zwicky's hypothesis of the tired light, with the consequential dismissal of the conjecture of the expansion of the universe and its never ending chain of additional conjectures. A rudimentary outline of Santilli's studies can be presented as follows:

When applied to cosmology, the discovery is often referred to as the Zwicky-Santilli effect, although the effect is generically known as Santilli isoredshift. where the prefix "iso" stands to indicate the new mathematics needed for its treatment. In this section we outline the main aspects of Prof. Santilli;s discovery.

Figure II.3: An illustration of the mechanism of Santilli's experimental verification of the behavior of light within physical media here assumed for simplicity to be composed by hydrogen [33]. When the diagram is seen from the right to the left, light hits a hydrogen atom at absolute zero degree temperature, said atom is then excited, by therefore absorbing energy from light, and resulting in a decrease of the frequency without any relative motion between the source, the medium and the observer called Santilli isoredshift [33]. Santilli then predicted that the effect is reversible in the sense that, when the diagram is seen from the left to the right, light hits a hydrogen atom in an excited state due to high temperature, in which case the atom is de-excited, the emitted energy is absorbed by light, resulting in an increase of the frequency without any relative speeds between the source, the medium and the observer called Santilli isoblueshift [33]. Note that the two effects cannon be represented with relativistic quantum mechanics because, in that as, the hydrogen atom must be abstracted as a point, with ensuing inability of representing the global effect of light on an extended atomic structure, although the effect is easily represented by relativistic hadronic mechanics [21] due to its capability of representing the actual extended size of the hydrogen atom with ensuing non-local interaction with the incoming electromagnetic waves.

MATHEMATICAL STUDIES. The mathematics underlying special relativity, such as the Minkowskian geometry, solely applies to the homogeneous and isotropic vacuum. As such, said mathematics is inapplicable for a consistent, quantitative representation of electromagnetic waves propagating within inhomogeneous and anisotropic media such as our atmosphere. Another insufficiency of 20th century mathematics is its abstraction of particles as massive points, which is certainly applicable for atomic structures, but basically insufficiency for interior problems, such as a proton in the core of a star.

For this reason, Santilli was forced to construct a new mathematics, today called Santilli isomathematics. for the representation of (time reversal invariant) systems of extended particles and electromagnetic waves propagating within inhomogeneous and anisotropic media. The foundations of the new mathematics were presented in monographs [18] when when he was in the faculty of Harvard University, and then completed in refs. [19,20] with a review presented in Vol. I of monographs [21] and large quoted literature. A rudimentary outline of the new mathematics is available in the joining debate Do Neutrinos Really Exist?

Figure II.4: In support of his hypothesis of the isoredshift of light within physical media, Santilli presented in Vol. II of Refs. [33] a quantitative interpretation of the large difference in cosmological redshift of Arp's quasars and their associated galaxies according to which said difference is reduced to large difference in density of the quasar chromosphere and that of the intergalactic medium, as a result of which light exits the quasar chromospheres much more redshifted than light existing galaxies. All other attempts in trying to reconcile said difference with special relativity have failed, thus leaving Santilli's interpretation as the best available to this day according to independent works (see, e.g. Ref. [34]).

PHYSICAL STUDIES. Following the achievement of the new isomathematics with particular reference to a suitable generalization of Lie's theory, Santilli achieved for the first time in scientific history the invariance of locally varying speeds of light within physical media C - c/n in the Nuovo Cimento Letter [22,23], the first at the classical level and the second at the operator level by reaching a new symmetry nowadays known as the Lorentz-Santilli isosymmetry.

After that, Santilli achieved the corresponding generalization of "all" spacetime symmetry in Refs. [24-29], resulting in a broader symmetry nowadays known as the Lorenz-Poincare'-Santilli isosymmetry, whose universality for all (time reversal invariant) processes within physical media was proved in Refs. [30-32] (see Vol. II of monographs [21] for a general review).

Figure II.5: A view of Santilli isoshift testing station used to establish that individual frequencies of laser light lose energy to (gain energy from) a cold (hot) gas, thus confirming Santilli isorelativity [33,1].

Following, and only following all these preliminary studies, Santilli achieved in Refs. [33] a step-by-step generalization of special relativity for dynamics within physical media, which generalization was studied again by Santilli in various works (see the latest account [1]), and it is nowadays known as Santilli isorelativity.

The feature of isorelativity most important for cosmology is the generalization of the Doppler axiom for the propagation of light in vacuum into a covering axiom for the propagation of light within physical media which can be written in first approximation

z &asy,p; ± v/c ± K d    (4)

where "+ v/c" ("- v/c") refers to the conventional Doppler effect for motion away (toward) the observer; K is constant (in first approximation); d is the distance traveled by light in the considered medium. "+ Hd" refer to a basically new effect called Santilli isoredshift characterized by light losing energy to a cold medium without any relative motion between the source, the medium and the observer; and "- Kd" is another basically new effect called Santilli isoblueshift according to which light gains energy from a hot medium also without any relative motion between the source, the medium and the observer.

Figure II.6: A view of the first historical scan in scientific record obtained by Santilli in 2010 [35], and then confirmed in numerous subsequent tests, establishing the decrease (isoredshift) of the frequency of a blue laser light (rad line) when passing through a gas at low temperature and the increase (isoblueshift) of the frequency (blue line) of the same laser light when propagating through the same gas but at high temperature. By remember that the immutability of light is the central pillar of special relativity, the scan reproduced in this figure establishes the inapplicability of Einstein's special relativity within a gaseous medium and, consequently, in our atmosphere as well as in the intergalactic medium.

EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES. Numerous physics laboratories around the world refused for decades the conduction of the simple experiments needed to confirm or deny the predictions of the isoredshift and the isoblueshift. according to law (4). Therefore, Santilli had no other choice than that of conducting the experiments himself at the laboratory of the Institute for Basic Research in Tarpon Springs, Florida. For this purpose he built the isoshift testing station depicted in Figure II.6 where he conducted systematic tests establishing that the individual frequencies of laser light do indeed experience an isoredshift when passing through a gas at low temperature and an isoblueshift when passing through the same gas at high temperature.

Figure II.7: One of the numerous scans of the entire spectrum, of visible Sunlight done by Santilli from the Zenith to the horizon establishing the existence of a redshift for about 90 nm, namely, the shift of Sunlight from the white color at the Zenith to the red color at the horizon [36049]. These measurements have provided experimental confirmation of the validity of Zwicky's hypothesis of tired light, resulting in an effect at times called the 'Zwicky0-Santilli effect.'

Following these tests, Santilli conducted additional systematic experimental measurements in the U.S.A. as well as in Europe establishing that Sunlight experiences an isoredshift of about 90 nano meters (nm) in the transition from the Zenith to the horizon [35-40 (see also the reviews [41-] (see Refs Since 90 nm are the difference in length between blue and red light [ Santilli's experiments establish that in the transition from the Zenith to the Horizon, blue Sunlight releases sufficient energy to our atmosphere to perform the transition into the red-light we see at Sunset (Figure II.1).

In particular, measurements [35-40] established that the Doppler effect is irrelevant for the redness of Sunlight at Sunset because, being given by v/c, it is of the order of 10-6 nm. Consequently, the redness of the Sun at Sunset is entirely due to Santilli isoredshift in law (4) and the same situation occurs for the cosmological redshift that emerges as being entirely due to the Zwicky-Santilli effect, without any need for the hyperbolic assumptions that entire galaxies move at very large speeds away from Earth..

Reference 37, page 158, states "the conventional Doppler shift is indeed visible to the naked eye." so the statement that "he Doppler effect is irrelevant for the redness of Sunlight at Sunset" is clearly wrong. Per Santilli's own statements.. Vds72tt

Vds72tt, thanks for the important question. I have contacted Dr. Santilli and he recalled the following. The Doppler shift is proportional to v/c, (see the first term in axiom (4) of isorelativity for physical media). An observer at the equator moves with a tangential speed of 1,200 Km/h away (toward) the Sun at Sunset (Sunrise) with consequential Doppler shift of about 10-6 nm with a positive (negative) value at Sunset (at Sunrise). This small value is ignorable for the redness of the Sun at Sunset and Sunrise which requites requires a shift ten millions times bigger and of the the order 85 nm. The latter is exactly represented by Santilli isoredshift (the second term in axiom (4) with positive value because independent form relative speeds and solely dependent on the density and temperature of the gaseous medium)). Prof. Santilli statement is that good eyes can perceive the color difference between Sunset and Sunrise due to the conventional Doppler shift despite its extremely small value. hence, the statement was intended to indicate the magnificent capabilities of our eyes compared to the limitations of our current measurements. ZeusSon

Message: Figure II.7 shows a difference in peak wavelength of approximately 200 nm, not 90. The figure is reproduced from reference [37], figure 12, and the reference states that the data reveals "a redshift of at least 200 nm", not 90. Kww88rr

Figure II.7 shows a difference in peak wavelength of approximately 200 nm, not 90. The figure is reproduced from reference [37], figure 12, and the reference states that the data reveals "a redshift of at least 200 nm", not 90.Fds42

THANK YOU Kww88rr, THANK YOU for pointing out my mistake, In fact, the transition from blue to red light requires 200 nm and this is precisely the amount of redshift measured by Prof. Santilli for the entire spectrum of visible Sunlight during the transition from the Zenith to the horizon. We apologize with Prof. Santilli for the mistake.ZeusSon.

Reference [39], page 332 states that "the prorating to Sunlight at the horizon of an IRS of 0.5 nm measured in the pipe (and hereon assumed as occurring at the low temperature of the upper atmosphere) yields indeed the IRS of about 100 nm needed for the representation of the redness of the Sun at Sunset ", so 200 nm is not required. And 90 nm is, arguably, close enough to 100 nm to qualify. Lgg23qi

"the transition from blue to red light requires 200 nm". In Reference [37], pages 144-145, Santilli states, "The transition from yellow to red implies an anomalous shift of about 55 nm/. However, by recalling that only blue light can reach us at the horizon, the anomalous redshift for both Sunset and Sunrise is expected as being of the order of 100 nm. Gew76pr

Colleagues, per available records, blue light has a wave length of 450 to 495 nm while red light has a wavelength of 700 nm. Hence, the IRS of the former into the latter requires indeed about 200 nm, as measured by Santilli and his collaborators in the transition of Sunlight from the Zenith to the horizon.. Careful, however, in reading papers [35-39] because of the number of different measurements of IRS. For instance, paper [39] measures the IRS of the entire spectrum of visible light which starts from its known value and ends up with new lines, such as the infrared frequencies that are absent in the detection at sea level of Sunlight at the Zenith, thus carrying an value of the IRS different than 200 nm. Note also the intriguing fact that the IRS of a "section" of the entire spectrum cannot be detected because it is found identical, yet at lower intensity in the transition from the Zenith to the horizon. This is due to Santilli';s important additional discovery that the entire spectrum of Sunlight is redshifted without relative motion (IRS-ed) in the transition the Zenith to the horizon. thus explaining that the search of an IRS for a segment of frequencies is futile. I consider this occurrence the most convincing evidence of the fact that Santilli IRSA represents the cosmological redshift precisely because in the latter we have the redshift of all frequencies as occurring in the former. I predict a Nobel Prize out there for grab by physicists who follow the footsteps of Santilli (now 83 year old), understands his new science, accepts it because miles beyond Einstein, and foresee the possibility that the IRS of the entire spectrum is expected to be a first approximation with different variations in the change of different frequencies for quasars, supernova, etc.Who wants to be in? Csq00ww

The blood-red color of the Moon during its total eclipse of yesterday (01-31-18) is generally 'explained as being due to the absorption of blue light by our atmosphere, thus remaining with red light

Quite frankly, this 'explanation' is disturbing, particularly when proffered by physics professors, because it violates the physical law according to which the absorption of light by a gaseous medium is proportional to its wavelength. In fact, blue light is the most penetrating light, while red light is quickly absorbed by our atmosphere as established by the evidence that the sky is blue (rather than red) because red light does not reach us following the relatively short travel wen the Sun is at the Zenith. The idea that red light could survive after traveling for over 10,000 miles in traversing our entire atmosphere (and produce the blood-red color of the Moon during its total eclipse) is simply preposterous, and clearly due to intentional manipulation of evidence to serve organized interests on special relativity with the misuse of large public sums. The sole scientific representation is that provided by Santilli isoredshift in Eq. (4) which, when the fuzz is cut out. boils down to the admission that light loses energy when traversing gaseous media at low temperature, thus experiencing a redshift without relative motion. The lack of admission of this so clean an evidence and its experimental verification is disturbing. Kzz77ww

I agree with Prof. Santilli and Kzz77ww. In December 2013 there was quite an inerest on pictures provided by astronaut Chris Hadfiel of his spaceship becoming blood-red at sunrise,

The official position by the physics s establishment was - again - the standard one, to the effect that the redness is due to the absorption of blue light by our atmosphere, thus leaving red light to reach the spaceship during Sunrise. National Public Radio (NPS) interviewed astronaut Hadfiel on Decemvir 23, 2014, with comments by academic physicists who voiced the above interpretation. I did listen to this show and was disturbed by the fact that presumably qualified physicists would present such a view despite its blatant disprove by so much evident in air and undersea while, by that time, Santilli's isoredshift had been amply verified (see the references of this Debate)and propagated. The problem is that light is the 'ground zero' of Einstein special relativity and any change of light implies its violation in favor of a covering relativity they do not want. I was disturbed by thus NPS show because they essentially assumed that I was stupid. Qualified physicists should know that special relativity was formulated solely for empty space, while the event deals with propagation of light within a gaseous medium under which condition the continued assumption of special relativity is politics at best or scam at times. I wrote to NPS requiring that they should interview Prof. Santilli for an alternative interpretation of the event by providing with copies of his experimental papers by receiving in return the offensive lack of a single line of reception. I learned in this way that NPS is controlled by the same interests that manipulate experimental evidence to maintain special relativity with the abuse of billions of taxpayer money and that democracy in America for important advances is gone, perhaps forever. Isg267ls

I do not believe that Santilli isoredshift can represent large cosmological redshift. Hhh55rr

Hhh55rr, either you express views without technical knowledge of the field or you are not in good faith and suffer too much at seeing your beloved special relativity be replaced by a covering theory. The Doppler-Santilli axiom (4) of isorelativity can represent any value whatsoever of the cosmological redshift due to its main dependence on the distance d. ZeusSon

In the event true, Zwicky's tired light would not allow far away galaxies to be seen by us. Hence, I do not accept Santilli;'s interpretation..Bfs92tr

Bfs92tr either you are not informed, or you are not in good faith, or - worse - you believe in Wikipedia [50]. The ONLY measurable information we receive from all galaxies, including those at the end of the known universe, is their light which is routinely measured by our telescopes. In the event true, your view would imply that we do not see galaxies at the edge of the universe because Zwicky's hypothesis merely provides an interpretation of this established fact. ZeusSon

In his historical work Isogravitation for matter and its isodual for antimatter and discussed in the Debate on General Relativituy vs Isorelativity, Prof.Santilli indicates that the lack of curvature of space is additionally established by the blood red color of the Moon during its total eclipse. This statement can be illustrated with the diagram

In fact, the lower part of the above diagram illustrates the incontrovertible experimental evidence that Sunlight is "bent" by our atmosphere due to its refraction caused by propagation in a medium with increasing density. The top view of the diagram establishes the incontrovertible physical evidence revived by Prof. Santilli following one century of denial, according to which star light is equally "bent" when passing near the Sun due to its refraction in the dense Sun chromosphere without any possibility for the actual curvature of space since the value of the bending is 50% due to refraction and 50% to Newton's gravitation. We are dealing with a physical event, refraction of light, which is known since Newton's time......., yet ignored by physics professors at the most important universities around the world..... how disturbing! Zre02lk

THANK YOU, Zre02lk, you do care for the image of American science throughout the world and in history. ZeusSon

the physical law according to which the absorption of light by a gaseous medium is proportional to its wavelength." This "law" has been repeatedly invoked, yet it applies only approximately to liquid water, and not at all to water vapor. Please provide a source to which we can refer. A reference to a scientific journal which reports specific measurements would be ideal. Ozol55lu

Dear Ozol55lu, thank you for your important comments. You are correct in stating that, according to a general view by the physics community, the proportionality with the wavelength of the absorption of light by a transparent medium has been solely established for the propagation of light in water, e.g., because below 20 m only blue light is seen underwater. As such, your view should be respected, but please respect prof. Santilli's different view based on his measurements of isoredshift which clearly confirm said law for air, although with due prorating for the reduction of density in the transition from water to air and other local data. The experimental papers you requested are Refs. [35-39]. Please inspect the progressive increase of the absorption of redshift compared to that of blue light, in the transition of Sunlight from the Zenith (about 100 Km trajectory) to the horizon (about 15,000 Km trajectory). In any case, physical laws are expected to be the same throughout the physical universe. Any quantitative criticism of the above view is welcome. ZeusSon

The official position by the physics establishment was - again - the standard one, to the effect that the" redness is due to the absorption of blue light by our atmosphere". No. The standard explanation invokes scattering, not absorption. If comments on NPR said absorption, the commenters were being sloppy and trying to use "normal" vocabulary to make it easier on the listeners. So any "counter-example" which you might have supplied would have been inappropriate. Scattering, not absorption. Vcx78qw

ZeusSon, Vcx78qw perhaps intended or implied to say that Prof. Santilli measured the redshift caused by the scattering of light in our atmosphere. This claim should be strongly dismissed because the IRS was first proved for laser light and then for "direct" Sunlight secured via a telescopes. In booth cases, the the claim that Prof. Santilli detected scattered light is political and intended to impose special relativity for the dynamics in our atmosphere where it does not apply Kew03yt

ZeusSon, sorry but you selected the wrong picture II.7 to illustrate Santilli IRS of Sunlight from the Zenith to the horizon. A better picture is the following one

It shows in an incontrovertible way that Sunlight (yellow) is entirely shifted toward the red without relative motion to such an extent that there is the birth of infrared wavelength not existing at the Zenith. I agree 1000% with Santilli to the effect that the constancy of light and special relativity are valid for empty space (exterior problem), but are inapplicable for propagation within physical media (interior problem) where light is a local variable in speed and physical characteristics. Note that the IRS of this picture is essentially the same for the cosmological redshift. Xza02oo

Thank you indeed. ZeusSon

I have read Refs [35 to 39] and they are generally bad. And in fact, I attempted to contact Amato to discuss their paper, but was blocked by Dr. Santilli personally. He stated that "I am the originator of these studies since I was at Harvard in the early 1980s and, as such, all discussions should be done with me." despite that fact that he had not conducted the research or written the paper. When I asked again to communicate with Amato he responded, "All your messages are heron automatically trashed. Bhw22ui

Bhw22ui, I have contacted Prof. Santilli and he sent me the email exchanges with you. I understand you also had an exchange with J. V. Kadeisvili, but he died after the tests of Re [39], see his Eulogy. I see in the emails Prof. Santilli's usual Italian-style cooperative opening toward you and harsh term only for the blog out there because so fake for so clear manipulations. Something went wrong... You question the role of G. Amato as the spokesperson of the collaboration. Why? What scheme you have in moind? Ref. [39] dealt with new mathematics for interior problems (Santilli isomathematics), new physics (Santilli isorelativity) and new experiments (Santilli IRS identified in the title of the paper) [1]. Amato put you in touch with the biggest living expert in these new sciences, with no comparison minimally in sight, and you, in return, had a blatant repulsion to have a technical exchange under your alias?? This is disturbing at best. Let's cut the fat out. In the event you are a serious scientist and have serious questions, you still have a chance to ask them here anonymously. You can bet your wallet they will be published and answered. In the event you are one of these manipulators of science for unethical schemes, I recommend you should stay in your ghetto because the century old unethical control of science is over and you will burn your little wings. ZeusSon

Vdw44yu, thank you for your clarification. However, please be aware that you are dealing with research on interior dynamical problems requiring the admission of anything departing from the vacuum. For the case of our atmosphere, this requires the admission not only of the most rarefied air, but also of the Van Allen Belt and the like. I am not an expert on the latter conditions and cannot express data. Regards ZeusSon

"Please inspect the progressive increase of the absorption of redshift compared to that of blue light, in the transition of Sunlight from the Zenith (about 100 Km trajectory) to the horizon (about 15,000 Km trajectory)" I've done so. Santilli has remarked on the need to consider path length equivalent to sea level density, but has never calculated such a path. He has asserted (with no calculation) ~1,500 km, but asserts a fallacious altitude/density relationship with no numbers. Qwe76po.<.p>

Qwe76po, I believe you are correct. Is there anybody interested in doing these calculations along the lines of interior problems indicated above? They require: 1) Identifying he value of the interior length of Sunlight travel at the Zenith; 2) Calculations of the secant intersecting at the horizon Earth's sphere and the sphere of 1); and, very important, 3) Adding the increase of length caused by the refraction of Sunlight in Earth's atmosphere, see Kzz77ww's comments and picture above, which increased considerably the trajectory. These calculations are important in astrophysics as we shall see in Section III.9, because allows, for the first time, to get some initial experimental data on inner-galactic and inter-galactic media where SR is no longer valid, which data have been ignored by 20th century cosmology. for evident political reasons. ZeusSon

"the transition from blue to red light requires 200 nm". In Reference [37], pages 144-145, Santilli states, "The transition from yellow to red implies an anomalous shift of about 55 nm/. However, by recalling that only blue light can reach us at the horizon, the anomalous redshift for both Sunset and Sunrise is expected as being of the order of 100 nm. Mhg34ew

Mhg34ew, Thanks for the comment. However, please note that your quotation refer to the IRS from yellow to red and not from blue to ref/. ZeusSon

"please respect Prof. Santilli's view based on his measurements of isoredshift which clearly confirm said law for air, although with due prorating for the reduction of density in the transition from water to air and other local data." I've read his papers. He has never measured absorption coefficients, nor has he ever calculated the prorated water equivalent in light paths. He simply asserts, without numerical justification, his reasons for rejecting conventional physics. Wqr78kg

"please respect prof. Santilli's... view based on his measurements of isoredshift which clearly confirm said law for air, although with due prorating for the reduction of density in the transition from water to air and other local data." I've read his papers. He has never measured absorption coefficients, nor has he ever calculated the prorated water equivalent in light paths. He simply asserts, without numerical justification, his reasons for rejecting conventional physics. Cwq39kj

Cwq9kj, you have a good list of good data to be studied. However, I see a political tint your contribution presented under the illusion of credibility. You literally claim that Fermi's Nobel Prize is fake since he achieved the first disintegration of nuclei without measuring a long list of consequential data. PROF. SANTILLI HAD DISCOVERED MATHEMATICALLY, THEORETICALLY AND EXPERIMENTALLY THE "EXISTENCE' OF REDSHIFT WITHOUT RELATIVE MOTION. THE REST IS UP TO YOU TO MEASURE, NOT PROF. SANTILLI, You will never to that because those measurements violate Einstein's theories. HighVista

Kew03yt stated, "the claim that Prof. Santilli detected scattered light is political" is untrue, since no such claim is made. Direct light is, of course, unscattered. However, its intensity is affected by scattering, since only the unscattered light remains in the beam. Since short wavelengths are scattered more than longer, long paths will produce light with a greater proportion of red vs blue than the original - in other words, the light becomes redder. This is not redshift. Lsr22hj

. Lsr22hj, Thank you for your intervention on which I agree. Allow me to clarify Prof. Santilli's posed the question as to whether the redshift of scattered light is also due to IRS. This is due to the theoretical assumption that scattering causes redshift, while Prof. Santilli has proved that reflection of light on a mirror experiences no redshift or blueshift. The question is indeed valid 9for serious scientists) because, at the photon level, there is no difference between reflection of a photon on a mirror or scattering following collision with an air molecule. At a deeper level, Santilli's point is the following: matter alters the geometry of spacetime from Minkowski to iso-Minkowski . Once you see that, the redness of scattered light must be due to IRS and not to scattering. HighVista

"I have contacted Prof. Santilli,and this is his view. Various measurements suggest that all events pertaining to the redshift of light moving within our atmosphere are due to the IRS" Entirely true. However, Santilli makes the fundamental error of characterizing the reddening of sunlight as redshift. It is not, and the difference is fundamental. So, since there is no redshift, the truth or falsity of IRS is a moot point. Cer87lk

Cer87lk ! Ten years of systematic measurements (I repeat, measurements) on redshift without relative motion, first done with laser light and then with Sunlight simply do not exist for you?? By ignoring them without any credible objection and you dream of being a scientist? I am afraid you have a problem. HighVista

" red light does not reach us following the relatively short travel wen the Sun is at the Zenith." Assuming that the atmosphere is at 25 C and 100% relativity, using standard humidity calculations provide that the equivalent water column for vertical travel is less than 20 cm. Even allowing Santilli's assumption that the absorption of liquid water is appropriate, it is clear that red light is not appreciably absorbed. Therefore there is no redshifting occurring. Qir98s

Qir98s, in the event Prof. Santilli would comment your Babel tower of assumptions he would state: "Under total freedom of assumptions, I can prove with a theorem that the Sun is an aggregate of excited bees." First of all, you have no knowledge of our atmosphere and of Prof. Santilli discoveries or, you you have such a knowledge but you are a crackpot. It is know in high school that the temperature of our atmosphere decreases rapidly with the elevation as WWII pilots knew well. Next you have no knowledge of what happens when light hits a molecule at low temperature. It becomes excited. Where is the energy coming from, your Babel tower? No, it comes from light itself, thus confirming Santilli redshift without relative motion. Above all your concoction denies the fact that our atmosphere is cold in the morning and hot at night. Where is the energy coming from? Again, the origin you deny: light. But then in your Bebel tower you deny the basic law E = hv and if you do, you deny the evidence that the decrease of E implies the decrease of v, I could go on and on. I believe the Editors accepted this post because illustrating the widespread posture of constructing Babel towers of disproofs whenever faced with novelty. When the novelty is theoretical, it's OK. When the novelty is experimental the Babel towers must be denounced for the sake of science. HighVista

For the benefit of serious scientists only, allow me to reproduce the Concluding Remarks of Ref. [39] because establishing what studied by Prof. Santilli for half a century. Ztr03yt

Concluding Remarks of Ref. [39]
In the authors' view, the most important cosmological implication of Santilli's mathematical, theoretical and experimental research on anomalous frequency shifts of electromagnetic waves propagating within physical, is the termination of the dominance of Einstein special relativity for the large scale structure of the universe, thus suggesting the advent of suitable covering theories along the {\it New Sciences for a New Era} of Ref. [33].\footnote{Einstein's general relativity has never been plausibly applicable to the large scale structure of the universe due to the large intergalactic distances, with consequential virtually null, large scale Riemannian curvature. At any rate, Einstein's gravitation has remained afflicted by very serious consistency problems that have remained unresolved for a century due to the general dismissal of their identification in refereed journals (see, e.g., the introductory outline by R. Anderson at www.santilli-foundation.org/Isogravitation.php). There is little doubt that, with a virtually null intergalactic gravitational field, as well as with unresolved fundamental structural problems, large scale studies on the structure of the universe based on Einstein gravitation will not resist the test of time.}

More generally, the measurements presented in this paper confirm Santilli's fifty years of research on the inapplicability (rather than the violation) of special relativity for all interior dynamical problems of extended particles and electromagnetic waves propagating within physical media, in favor of Santilli's central methodological notion of {\it mutation of spacetime} caused by the presence of matter (or energy), with ensuing validity of the covering Lorentz-Poincar\'e-Santilli isosymmetry and related isorelativity as outlined in Sections 1, 2, 3.

This occurrence will inevitably require a re-inspection of the virtual entire 20th century physics representing interior dynamical problems in a form compatible with Einstein special relativity, thus including a re-inspection of the structure of hadrons, nuclei, stars, high energy scattering theories, grand unified theories including the structure (rather than the sole classification) of particles, and other fields.

It is appropriate to recall here Santilli's insistence that particles can indeed have point-like charges" like the electron, but there exist no particles with point-like wavepackets." This implies that hadrons, nuclei, stars and scattering regions are composed by a hyperdense medium characterized by wavepacksts under conditions of total mutual penetration, rather than by isolated point particles as currently conjectured.

Therefore, the experimental evidence confirmed in this paper on deviations from special relativity within a medium of such a light density as Earth's atmosphere, establishes the inapplicability of special relativity within hadrons, nuclei, stars and scattering regions beyond a scientific doubt.

Independently from the above, to seriously understand and appraise the scientific moment, the reader should know that Santilli's mutation of spacetime has received experimental confirmations in numerous interior dynamical conditions ranging from classical mechanics to biology (see Ref. [33] for a general review).

As Santilli puts it: Rather than abusing Einstein's name by applying the 20th century realization of his theories under conditions they were never intended for and are experimentally disproved in any case, the best way to honor Einstein's name is that of maintaining his axioms, and merely introducing broader realizations for the representation of more complex physical conditions as permitted by the very conception and technical realization of the broader isomathematics."

"Colleagues,... such as the infrared frequencies that are absent in the detection at sea level of Sunlight at the Zenith" The absent IR (shown, for instance, in Figure II.7), is actually a mark of Santilli's sloppy experimentation. The zero level at 1100 nm is a function of spectrometer grating efficiency and detector response. Santilli failed to radiometrically calibrate his spectrometer (there is even a Youtube clip which gives instructions). This distorts all of his data. Fwe38yo

Fwe38yo's dishonesty is not only evident in the offensive language, but from the fact reported in Ref. [39] that all measurements were done with the best available wavelength analyzer, that by Yokogawa, under the supervision by a technician from the Japanese . manufacturer. Fwe38yo is another member of a large organization maintaining Einstein's theories where they do not belong via studious misrepresentations that, following one century of unchallenged successes, are maintained under the dream of credibility. DemocritusSon

Wikipedia has stated in his Article that Santilli sues physicists who do not agree with him. Do you have any comment? Csa12qp

Csa12qpm thanks for the question. As it is routine by serious scientists, Santilli has a long reputation of requesting technical criticisms on all his works prior as well as after their publication. The published claim that Santilli sued colleagues because disagreeing with his views is the usual Wikipedia dishonesty to discredit advances not aligned with their agenda (Section I.10). In reality, Santilli has indeed sued in U. S. federal Court Frank Israel (head of the Skeptic Society in The Netherlands), his associate Pepijn van Erp and others because of their, totally unprovoked, vulgar and libelous defamation of his personal, scientific and business life without any technical argument whatsoever, since Israel, van Erp& Co are illiterate in Santilli's post Ph. D. advances. DemocritusSon

Where I can find Santilli lawsuit against Frank Israel? Few92oi

I believ - but you have to check it our - you should find it in the website at the U. S. Federal Court the District of Tampa, Florida. I am, told that you have to pay ten cents per page top see it! It's their new rule, certainly not mine! DemocritusSon

I am a member of a group of scientist who has collected all the necessary money to secure the entire legal proceedings of Santilli's lawsuit against Frank Israel et al, and publish them for posterity to see how organized Einstein fanatics have kept contrail of science for one century. Deww95jh

The premise of the expansion and of the acceleration of the expansion is that G1 is accelerating away from E faster than G2, they do this after compensating for the time distance of G1 being greater and so adjusting the true position due to the lightspeed time lag at a given time. wtr99fo EDITORIAL NOET: this message contineud with a series of ad hoc adaptations to Einsteinian theories.

wtr99fo, somebody should tell you that these chains of hyperbolic adaptations of the serious experimental evidence (the Hubble law) to maintain Einstein theories in cosmology is extremely unethical because extremely farfetched, without a shadow of physical content, and with a vast array of inconsistencies and experimental disproofs you completely ignore and do dot even care to counter. And then you dream to be believed? It is because of people like you that Americans have requested the intervention of the Attorney General to peek into the abuse of taxpayer money in these unethical fancies. Check it out to see whether you are in the list of investigated guys.Demopstrituson

May I know the low and high temperature in your red/blue shift experiment. My I know also the length of the travel of light to be measured? I can make the same effect with a lo cut optical filter to move the max of the black body radiation. It should be better to measure red/blue shift of the absorption line of hydrogen. What do you think? Cds32ps

Dear Cds32ps, thank you for your nice, clean scientific questions without politics. They are a rarity these days. To my knowledge, Prof. Santilli established: 1) The "existence" of the isoredshift for a blue laser light traveling for 6o' though air at 2,000 psi pressure and at temperature below freezing; 2) The "existence" of the isoblueshift for the same laser light in the same conditions but with the air above boiling temperature; and 3) the "existence" of the no-isoshift for the same blue light in the same conditions but at a temperature intermediate between freezing and boiling. That;s sufficient for a first discovery. Specific temperature values for specific conditions are expected to be measured by others when academia turns out to be clean again. Your proposal for an alternative way of achieving the same results is very interesting. I suggest you should contact Prof. Santilli directly at his email research(at)i-b-r(dot)org . You will, find him very nice and cooperative toward serious science (not so for maniac gangsters out there...).JupiterSon

We measure red shift of galaxies distant 13 billion light years. That means that the photons were emitted when the universe was very very young! It is not the actual red shift we measure now but the red shift when the universe was very young In the same manner, these very distant galaxies are missing now since billion and billion years.bI am right or no? Gre63rt

Today is my lucky day. Gre63rt, thanks v for your nice and sinecure questions. Allow me, very respectfully, to indicate two alternative views for your questions. The statement that the photons were emitted when the universe was very yang assumes the belief of the big bang that was a scientific scam due to the excessive inconsistencies (see Section 1.5) to explain the failed expansion of the universe, According to all serious experiment evidence we have now the universe is static as believed by Einstein,.Hubble, Hoyle,m Fermi, and other famous scientists and NOT according to c contemporary corrupt academic physicists. The second point deals with your question when the photons are emitted. You assume the belief that the photons are always the same during the 3 million light year travel., Allow me to disagree, respectfully, but stringily. Light traveling within the intergalactic medium is continuously varying.The cosmological redshift is progressive since its numeric value is proportional to the covered distance according to Hubble fundamental law (1). With reference to Figure II.3, light loses energy E = hv to the cold inter-galactic medium with ensuing redshift without relative motion o9Santilli isoredshift). In the event we could detect the same photons at 1 million light year distance, I can assure you that they would be different. Please feel free to ask any additional question. Best sincere best wishes for you. JupiterSon

I think that there is no consensus to say if the Universe is flat or curved. If it is curved, there is no consesus to say if it is convex or horse saddle. Nevertheless, if you do not admitt the curvature of space-time around the sun, how do you explain the lense effect due to massive galaxies in the traject of light coming from distant galaxies? b Fds44oo

Unbelievable for contemporary standard. Here is another beautifully stated reality, namely, the lack of general consensus on current cosmological models That is a serious scientific statement without politics. The statements we state to be corrupt are the claims that the universe is certainly expanding while ignoring a plethora of inconsistencies and experimental disproofs. Your clean questions are also very deep and stimulating. I suggest you should contact Prof. santilli directly (his Email is research(at)org) DemocritusSon

I must agree with Prof. Santilli that the current interpretation of the "gravitational; lenses" as being due to the curvature of space is not correct. In reality, the very gravitational origin of the lens effect is not universal and, therefore, the very name of "gravitational lenses" is questionable in general. I agree with Prof. Santilli that "lens effects" are primarily due to the refraction of light within astrophysical chromospheres as illustrated by the diagram from https://oneminuteastronomer.com/9237/gravitational-lens/

The argument is that there are large lens effect caused by masses with insufficient gravitation and very small lens effects caused by very large gravitational masses. This evidence establishes the existence of a first class of lens effects essentially due to refraction of light in gases with ignorable gravitational origin. Then there is a second class of lens effect primarily due to gravitation, but I have to agree with Prof. Santilli that the gravitation is purely Newtonian due to the lack of actual curvature of space. Finally, there is a third class of lens effect due to a mixture of refraction and Neptunian gravitation. I would like to thank the Editor of this Debate (Email: admin(at)galileoprincipia(dot)org) for accepting my email and picture. Cew86pu

Thank you, Cew86pu for your serious scientific post without the usual politics . DemocritusSon

I have contacted Prof. Santilli (Email: research(at)i-b-r(dot)org) with my real name and asked his opinion on the curvature of space. I received this answer with authorization of release: "Dear Prof. ... thank you for your respectful email addressing a most important open problem of contemporary science. Before I can conduct an in depth study of the curvature of soace, I need to know what space is. I am told by my former academic colleagues that space can have no physical characteristics inn order not to violate Einstein's theories with a privilege reference frame. But then the question arises: if space is nothing, how can nothing be curved? and then the other question arises: to see curvature in three dimensional space we need a forth sopace dimension that does not exist, (since we see the curvature in a plane via a view in three dimensions;l)? and, more seriously, admitting that nothing is curved, how can a curvature of nothing force entire planets such as Jupiter to rotate independently from their dynamics? I am sorry but at that point i simply cannot follow my academic colleagues. these are some of the basic insufficiencies of the curvature of space that lead to our systematic experimental verification that 'bending of light,' 'gravitational lens effects' and other effects are due to the refraction of light in astrophysical atmospheres or chromospheres plus the conventional Euclidean Newton gravitation. In conclusion, I believe that the curvature of space is a magnificent "mathematica'" not deprived of any actual physical content whatsoever." .Cse32tt

Thank you, Cse32tt for your serious scientific post without the usual politics . DemocritusSon

Xza02oo's figure represents a great deal of misinformation. First, it ignores the fact that the different curves are presented at wildly different scaling. The zenith curve is actually at least 20 times greater than shown, if the dawn/dusk curve is taken as correct. The other curves require similar correction. This derives from the fact that the spectrometer integration times were varied depending on the sun's brightness. When these corrections are made, each curve fits entirely within the next greater, and no curve shows a redshift to a value outside of that of a shorter path. ZAA53rw message etrnminated by the editorial board because excdessively political.

My luck is ended, and I am back to comments on intentionally manipulated criticisms of undesired new experimental evidence because against Einstein;'s theories. Here is a first pearl from this guy/gal: "different curves are presented at wildly different scaling". This guy/gal tries to discredit serious systematic measurements on Santilli's IRS on grounds that the indicated curve uses different scales for the intensity. Santilli;s IRS deals with wavelength shifts for whatever intensity scale one wishes. Here is another pearl "The zenith curve is actually at least 20 times greater than shown," This guy/gal is ignorant on the Yokogawa wavelength analyzer or, more credibly, he/she is fully expert in the field, and in reality he.she is a crook. As stated in paper [39], the curve at the Zenith as well as at all subsequent elevations were obtained by the Yokogawa analyzer under the supervision of a technician from the manufacturer and what he/she claims is total nonsense. This is last peals from this guy/gal: "the spectrometer integration times were varied depending on the sun's brightness." This statement proves that this guy/gal is a member of the organized scientific crime on Einstein because he/she tries to discredit experimental measurements by claiming the existence of periodic adjustments of the data. Far from anything resembling science, this is intentional slander as done repeatedly against Prof, Santilli by the organized scientific crime on Einstein. Consequently, the guy/gal is treated with the same money as permitted by the Torah. DemocritusSon

While Ref [39] does present some Yokogawa data, that fact is irrelevant. The figure in question appears in [39] as Figure 21, and it clearly states that it uses data from Figure 20. Figure 20, in turn, is specifically identified as "via the use of the Avantes wavelength analyzer model AvaSpec 3648". Inspection of Figure 20 also shows the characteristic trend to zero at 1100 nm which I identified. For comparison, Figure 17 shows Yokogawa data, and the 1100 nm zero does not occur. The Avantes data is, simply, wrong, as is the figure which DemocritusSon included, and pointing out this failure is hardly a case of dishonesty. Few72oi This messagee has been cut because expressing a series of objections against measurements [35-39] without any techniucal evdience at all.

Few72oi states that measurements of ref.[39] via the Avantes wavelength analyzer are "wrong." On what ground? because they disagree with Einstein's theories and he/she says so. The full agreements of the independently tested Avantes and Yokogawa analyzer is intentionally ignored. This guy/gal is clearly a member of the organized scientific crime on Einstein that manipulated for one century physical evidence to verify Einstein theories (the documented list is too too long for review here but available for posterity to judge....). Since this guy/gal became accustomed to be respected following his/her scientific crimes he/she dreams that he/she can continue to do so not only with impunity but also expecting respect - a mentality which is strongly reminiscent of the Gestapo. Well, after one century foe exploitation of mankind for immoral schemes,this type of scientific crime is now over. Guys/gals such as this one are nowadays treated in Federal Court and reported to the Attorney general in the event, after having abused billions of America dollars, they continue to use one additional penny of public money for their asocial and amoral schemed. America is a technological civilization whose survival is depends on new sciences and technologies achieved via serious process.. Hence, this organized scientific crime on Einstein constitutes a real threat to our very survival. DemocritusSon

I want to congratulate Prof. santilli for his IRS and IBS because they allow for the first time the identification of the physucal characteristics of inter0galactiuc and inner-galactic gases, such as density, temperature, etc.Bds82iy

Thanks for the honesty so rare these days. DemocritusSon

I am a member of an important U. S. Department of Physics. My colleagues want to repeat Santilli's experiments to disprove them as follows. Santilli proved that the the same laser light passing through the same 60' long pipe containing air at 2,000 psi pressure experiences the IRS when air is below freezing temperature and experiences the IBS when the air under the same conditions is above boiling temperature, thus passing necessarily through temperatures at which we have Santilli NIS (no frequency shift without relative motion) [35]. My colleagues want to repeat Santilli's tests at the temperature of NIS, then claim that the results apply for all temperer and use their "friends" at PR to gain credibility, claim that Santilli is wrong and achieve their main goal, maintain the validity of SR in air. This type of rather widespread conduction of our science under public support makes me puke. I hope that the Santilli Foundation keeps track of public releases, and files a lawsuit against our administration, where the gangrene sits. in which case I will offer my sworn testimonial. I pray the Editors of this Forum to publish this message to give me a chance of preventing another shameful episode of our science. Cds88ow

Thank you Cds88ow. It is for physicists like you that America science has a chance of returning to "sanity" [89] per Karl Popper view. DenocritusSon

"The century-old discreditation of Zwicky's tired light without serious technical arguments" is an untrue assertion. Zwicky himself granted that simple interaction with the medium would produce scattering which is not seen and so cannot be a mechanism. He postulated a "gravitational analog" to the Compton Effect, and a good deal of effort was put into examining data to support such an effect. Cew33or

Dear Cew33or,, thank you for raising a serious issue in the proper scientific language that, as such, deserves full respect. Please note that the indicated objection against the hypothesis of Tired Light is disproved by evidence, for instance, by the propagation of a light beam in water

center>

As you can see, light does indeed experience scattering during its propagation in water as you correctly imp[lied, but such a scattering is quantitatively small, yet it causes the a decrease of the luminosity of the source with the increase of the propagation in water (see the forthcoming Section III.9 for rather intriguing implications). The point important for cosmology is that the light beam fully maintains its characteristics as a beam during propagation in wather. If this happens in water under the reduction of speed by 1/3, the lack of true applicability of the objection you raise for the extremely rarefied inter-galactic medium is beyond doubt. With sincere respect and specifically in your interest, allow me to indicate that the objection you fraise is entirely due to the entry-old manipulation of scientific knowledge to verify Einstein's theories in interior dynamical problems. By remembering that Einstein introduced the photons for the :absorption" of "certain frequencies" under certain conditions, the first manipulation for interior conditions has been done via the reduction to photons of "all" light "propagating" within physical media. The untold politics is that, under such an assumption, photons propagate in vacuum, as necessary to verify special relativity, and therefore they are assumed to scatter between the medium molecules. This manipulation has been debunked in various papers published in refereed journals and, therefore, has no longer any credibility because said reduction cannot represent quantitatively the angle of refraction, the reduction of speed by 1/3, the propagation along a beam, the violation of the relativistic sum of light speeds, etc, besides said reduction is not applicable to infrared and radio waves with large wavelength (see Ref. [1] for details and quotations). In reality, there have been no scientific work on the propagation of light within physical media besides incredible political machinations, until the mathematical, theoretical and experimental works by Prof. Santilli who achieved a numerical and invariant reresentation of Hubble's law (1) via his isoredshift (redshift without relative motion). Since the intergalactic medium cannot be denied when dealing with extremely long propagations, light should scatter when passing through such a medium. Consequently, the objection you raise applies identically to Hubble's law. But galactic light reaches us after passing for billions of light years in the intergalactic medium, thus illustrating the political character of the objection. On historical grounds you should also known that Zwicky was under pressure by Einstein';s supporters to reconsider his hypothesis of the tired light, as it was the case for Halton Harvard astrophysics professor Arp (Section II.1) Prof. Santilli [86] and all other scientists who dared to deviate from Einstein. Arp and Santilli refused to reconsider their discoveries and, therefore, they were forced by organized interests on Einstein to leave the U. S. academia. It is known by serious historians that Zwicky was forced by the same organized ring to reconsider his hypothesis of the tired light as a condition to remain [art of the Swiss academia. Your recollection of Zwicky's reconsideration is evidence to that effect and, more importantly, brings to historical light Zwicky's point that his hypothesis could be tested, as Santilli one century later. DemocritusSon

Message: Cds88ow - The results reported in [35] were conducted at 21 C and 54 C. Neither of these temperatures were below freezing or above boiling.Ods54ow

Ods54ow, you are correct, but do you miss the point intentionally? Ye values of temperatures below freezing and over boiling indicated in this Forum are clearly intended ton suggest the maximal values of Santilli IRS and IBS, respectively. DemocritusSon

The Santilli IRS/IBS implies that, depending on temperature, stationary targets will appear to have a relative velocity which increases with range, since the reflected radiation will be frequency shifted the same way as classic Doppler shifts. This will be true both of RF and IR Doppler radar units. Since such apparent velocities are not observed, why not? Kkk55ee

Kkk55ee, your mnind is indeed totally paralized by Einstein's theories as the final theories for the totality of the universe to the end of time. In fact, the appearance of a relative speed between stationary objects implies the tacit assumption of the Doppler axioms of special relativity which is inapplicable within physical media. DemocritusSon

DemocritusSon - "Few72oi states that measurements of ref.[39] via the Avantes wavelength analyzer are "wrong." On what ground?" On the ground that they do not agree with the Yokogawa data. Avantes shows 1100 nm and longer at zero. Yokogawa shows the level at about 30% of peak. The Avantes data is consistent with the detector response curve available from Avantes, which does not respond above 1100 nm. If the Avantes is not wrong, then the Yokogawa is. Take your pick.Was73iw

Dear Was73iw, thank you for providing a scientific answer to my question in scientific language. I believe ghat the points you identify are correct. although I am not an expert in the field and have to defer the answer to the authors of paper [39]. However, allow me to indicate that the difference in the range of detected nm implies corresponding differences in the data. please note that my post you refer to was aimed at denouncing the use of possible differences between the Avantes and the Yokogawa measurements as evidence to "disproof" of the existence of Santilli IRS and IBS which is purely political..

DemocritusSon - "he/she tries to discredit experimental measurements by claiming the existence of periodic adjustments of the data. " The data can be downloaded from Santilli's web site. It's Cocoa Beach data, 0, 1, 2 degrees and Zenith. Integration times per the files are 3 seconds, .29 seconds, .15 seconds and .014 seconds. And yes, I was wrong - the zenith/horizon ratio is 214 to 1, not 20. My bad.See http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/IRS-sun.zip Cds42pp

Cds42pp, thanks for the clarification expressed in respectful language that I leave to interested experts for analysis. My function is that of respecting serious scientists while treating crooks in the proper manner.DemocritusSon

MESSAGE RECEIVED AT ADMIN:d day - In the discussion, "Geometric and experimental evidence on the lack of expansion of the universe, the need for antimatter galaxies and the new era in cosmology", Responder DemocritusSon has twice explicitly accused me of dishonesty. "Fwe38yo's dishonesty is not only evident in the offensive language, but from the fact reported in Ref. [39] that all measurements were done with the best available wavelength analyzer, that by Yokogawa,under the supervision by a technician from the Japanese. manufacturer." "This guy/gal is ignorant on the Yokogawa wavelength analyzer or, more credibly, he/she is fully expert in the field, and in reality he.she is a crook. As stated in paper [39], the curve at the Zenith as well as at all subsequent elevations were obtained by the Yokogawa analyzer under the supervision of a technician from the manufacturer and what he/she claims is total nonsense." Since you saw fit to publish these comments, please consider publishing the following impersonal facts, readily verified by reading the paper. In fact, 3 different spectrometers were used, "To clarify this aspect, Ref. [14] reports spectrographic measurements of Sunlight from the Zenith to the horizon via an Avantes, wavelength analyzer model Avaspec-3648-USB2-FCPC capable of detecting frequencies from 450 to 570 nm (from green to red). Santilli et al. [loc. cit.] secured a Yokogawa wavelength analyzer model AQ6373 with the range from 400 to 1100 nm and conducted systematic measurements of direct Sunlight from the Zenith down to the horizon Additionally, Santilli et al. [14] conducted confirmatory measurements of the scans obtained via an Avantes wavelength analyzer model AvaSpec 3648 capable of detecting Sunlight frequencies from 400 to 1100 nm." Figure 21, reproduced by Xza02oo, states in its caption, "Confirmation of the elaboration of scans as in Fig. 17, this time obtained via the measurements of Fig. 20". That figure 20 was produced by an Avantes spectrometer, rather than a Yokogawa, should have been obvious from the "AVANTES" watermarks on the graphs. Figure 17, on the other hand does represent Yokogawa data. "Representative chromatographs of Sunlight from the Zenith to the horizon obtained on September 20, 2012, at the island of Kos, Greece, via the use of the Avantes wavelength analyzer model AvaSpec-ULS2048" (Figure 25). Furthermore, the statement that "all measurements were done ... under the supervision of a technician from the manufacturer" is unsupported. The only mention of a Yokogawa representative occurs in the caption of figure 13, which shows the Magnegas facility, and the caption refers to "calibration". There is no mention in the paper of a representative being present (let alone supervising) during data acquisition at either Cocoa Beach or Kos, Greece. I have been accused of dishonesty and being a "crook" by an individual who has apparently not read the paper he cites. I suggest an apology is in order. Although I will grant that it's nice the DemocritusSon suggests that I am "expert in the field", although that is not true. It is sad the DemocritusSon seems to equate expertise with simply paying attention to facts.

In the event I was in error in judging the abive poster, I do apologize. I admit to have seen so many adulterations of science expressed in foul language that I may see them even where they are absent. However, the last two paragraphs appear to confirm the intent of manipulating serious work to preserve the beloved Einstein. In fact, the issue of the presence of a Yokogawa technician and his role whether for calibrating or for supervision - of what? the proper use of the instrument cf course - are out of whack. The presence of the Yokogawa technician is indeed quoted in Ref. [39] and his payment can be traced. Full stop. Any dwelling in such a so peripheral an issue can well be evidence of derailing attention away from undesired main results. As a Santilli follower I am solely interested in the serious pursuit of new knowledge - that, to be really new nowadays has to be beyond Einstein - expressed in proper scientific language without frills and tangents. DemocritusSon

Cds32ps - JupiterSon is in error. Please read References [35] and [39]. Don't worry about all the early derivations and justifications - concentrate on the experimental descriptions. In both cases, Santilli used a 60 foot tube, pressurized to approximately 2000 psi as JupiterSon reports. In describing the observed redshifts of Rec [35], Santilli failed to report the temperature at which the observations were taken, despite having postulated that such effects would be temperature-dependent. Since the time of year is not reported either, and the tube was exposed to the outdoors in the vicinity of Tampa, Florida, it is unlikely that temperatures were below freezing, and may well have been much higher. There is no way to know from the paper. In Ref[39] The experiments are described with more care, and the time of day was selected specifically to ensure temperatures below 21 C (for red shifts) or at approximately 54 C (for blue shifts). Since this was done in summer, the red shift experiments cannot have been performed at temperatures appreciably lower than 21 C, and were certainly not below freezing. Wsa34io

The claim "Since this was done in summer, the red shift experiments cannot have been performed at temperatures appreciably lower than 21 C, and were certainly not below freezing" is puerile. In fact, Santilli enveloped the 60' pipe with ice. Serious scholars should also listed to the talk at the 2011 San marino International Conference Lecture by G. West and G. Amato which was previsouly quoted but ignotred by this poster.

"The claim "...the red shift experiments cannot have been performed at temperatures appreciably lower than 21 C" is puerile. In fact, Santilli enveloped the 60' pipe with ice." No. [39] p137, and the San Marino West/Amato video (08:55) state that IRS measurements were taken at night in order to get low temps. At 22:50 of the video it is stated that refrigeration of some sort (not "enveloped with ice") is planned. No such data has been published. Am I the only one who actually reads these papers? Tre35oo

Dear Tre35oo, Thank you for your important question expressed in serious scientific language. I regret to say that, to my knowledge, the published data are those listed in the References of this Forum. Again, Prof. Santilli's aim has been to established the ":existence" of the isoredshift, noisoshift and isoblueshift. Again, what we know for sure is that a blue laser light traveling in a 60' long steel pipe containing air at 2,000 psi experiences: 1) a clearly identifiable isoredshift when the pipe is below freezing temperature (achieved by submerging the pipe with ice); 2) a clearly identifiable isoblueshift when the pipe is above boiling temperatures (achieved by surrounding the pipe with a heating coil);' and 3) no isoshift at an intermediate temperature. Numerous additional measurements are need to achieve "accurate" data in the intermediate temperatures you indicate. In the event you are interested in doing additional measurements, I have heard rd that the Santilli Foundation can provide some of the necessary funds. DemocritusSon

Dear prof. R. Santilli, the debate with words can also be very long. I would like to see detailed calculations from you with your theory, which tend to explain measured or experimental data. For example, show how the precession of the perihelion of Mercury or the deflection of light of a massive object, or how to predict the production of matter and antimatter, using experimental diagrams. Also, could you draw a Feynman diagram of the process or one corresponding to what you are saying describing it in mathematical terms? Thank you Jer64pu

Dear Jer64pu,thank you for the list of excellent issues to be addressed. Thanks also for signing the post with yur real name that we cannot disclose to protect you from sharks out there in academia. Prof. Santilli is now extremely busy on the development new technologies at Thunder Energies Corporation.. There is no point contacting him now except for short consultations as we do. Here are my comments to be best of my knowledge:
1. Please do not expect equations in this Forum - except extremely few - because this Forum is intended as a conceptual introduction of the new sciences for interested scholars. "All" calculations are done in the references.
2. Prof. Santilli's calculations on his three isoshifts cover well over 10,000 pages of published research. Our of 20 post PhD monographs and some 320 papers, we quoted here the main references [19-39] with 150 pages "summary" [1] whose content is conceptually outlined in this section. First you have to learn the new mathematics for interior dynamical problems; then you have to learn the generalization of all aspects of the Poincare' symmetry for locally varying speeds of light within physical media; then you have to learn the fundamental geometry for :all" studies presented in this Forum, the Minkowski-Santilli isogeometry; then you have to learn Prof,. Santilli's isorelativity, then you have to learn the "prediction" by isorelativity of the three isoshifts; and finally you can study their experimental verifications [35-39]. Expecting more calculations by one person in this field is our of reality.
3. Your important question on the precession of the perihelium of Mercury shows that you have not sufficiently studied Prof. Santilli's work in gravitation. I suggest you should first read the Forum on Debating general relativity to known open problems in gravitations that have been kept hidden for one century. Then you should study the all important Minkowski0-santilli isogeometry, [29], and finally study Prof. Santilli's isogravitation [106]. Only after studying at least these works you can see the answer to your important question. The basic equations of isogravitation are Einstein's field equations only formulated in a new "isoflat" geometry as a necessary condition to resolve the incompatibility of Einstein;s gravitation with 20th century sciences. Then, and only then, you will see that the representation of the precession of the perihelium of Mercury in isogravitation is identical to that of Einstein gravitation. I assume you know that the representation of the precession of the perihelium of Mercury has been proved various times via the conventional Minkowski geometry and, outside the thick politics in the field, it does not require "an imaginary curvature on a space which is nothing," per Prof. Santilli;s works.
4. The calculations for the representation of the "bending of light" when passing through the Sun chromosphere are known since Newton;s time. You simply have the refraction of light passing through a medium, bending originates inevitably when the medium has an increasing density as it is the case for said chromosphere. This is so well known and experimentally established over centuries to requite no new calculations except by a first yet graduate student. Buts. that;s four century old stuff. In the 21st century you can do it via the isoshift and the use of the mathematics, indicated in comments 1.
5. Your suggestion that Prof. Santilli should do "calculations via Feynman diagrams" shows again that you have not done any study of Prof, Santilli;sscientific papers, rather than reading blogs or emails. We are talking Prof. Santilli entire 50 year scientific production. First you have to admit to yourself that, Outside of politics, you cannot consistently formulate the axioms of Galileo and Einstein special relativity within physical media for many reasons. That's what the new sciences are for, new mathematics, new physics and new chemistry for dynamics within physical media. Once you achieve that knowledge you will see that Feynman diagram are magnificent for what their were developed for, scattering of point like electrons and photons in vacuum, but they have(think of protons and neutrons in the core of a star) requiring the coveting iso-, geno- and hyper-diagrams, see the five papers [110]. You put the finger in the very reason Prof. Santilli does not accept the "experimental results" claimed b7 CERN, FERMILAB, DESY, etc. because they elaborate data via Feynman diagrams, that is, by assuming the the very high energy collision of the very large and hyperdense protons on a dense target can be reduced to a bunch of isolated point particles in vacuum, s NECESSARY to apply Feynman diagram. Sorry, such a reduction is an opinion and certainly not experimental veritas that will resist the test of time.

DemocritusSon has commented, "The presence of the Yokogawa technician is indeed quoted in Ref. [39] and his payment can be traced. Full stop." This is hardly a full stop. If DemocritusSon can trace the technician's payment and share the details here, the comment is appropriate. Otherwise, not so much. If the payment details do not cover 18 Mar 2012 or 20 Sep 2012, the technician was not present when the data was taken, let alone supervising. I await the payment details with some interest. Fre63oi

Fre63oi, you self-qualified yourself by turning science into payments. The problem is that you did not do that for experiments manipulated to verify Einstein. DemocritusSon COMMENTS EDITED BY THE EDITORIAL BOARD

DemocritusSon commented, "Fre63oi, you self-qualified yourself by turning science into payments." If so, I merely followed your lead, when you wrote, "The presence of the Yokogawa technician is indeed quoted in Ref. [39] and his payment can be traced." If the matter of payment is not germane, why did you bring it up? Details of such payment would indeed be applicable, but only so far as they support or deny your claim that data was taken "under the supervision" of a Yokogawa technician. Dew44ou

Dew44ou, be honest. Admit that you want to keep the dominance of Einstein in cosmology. Consequently, Santilli's isoredshift really bothers you because it cuts Einstein out of physical media, including the inter-galactic medium. What you forgot dreaming to catch a little tangent is that the payment of the Yokogawa technician was done by a publicly traded, thus fully audited company. So, rather than implying that the authors of Ref. [39] are liars, admit you are a member of what is now universally called "the organized scientific crime on Einstein." It is so evident inn any case. JupiterSon.

DemocritusSon commented - "In fact, the appearance of a relative speed between stationary objects implies the tacit assumption of the Doppler axioms of special relativity". No. It is called the "Doppler-Santilli isoshift ",and is explicitly given by equation (4) of this section. Please pay attention to what Santilli says. The frequency shift of radiation (from which velocity can be inferred by radar guns) depends on both range and velocity. The IRS is indistinguishable from a Doppler shift. Hre63pr

I cannot believe what I read from Hre63pr. This ultra Einstein fanatic denies the huge difference between the Doppler's shift requiring relative motion and Santilli shift of light within physical media requiring no shift at all per experimenta; evidence [34-39]. This is a clear illustration of how organized interests on Einstein have managed to manipulate science with proved fake theories for one century. It is unbelievable that after tons of disproofs this guy/gal still dreams of imposing the fake cosmology based on Einstein 9PART I....) becaiuse he/she feels a superior being. I think this guy/gal should be hospitalized.. JupiterSon

DemocritusSon commented, "In the event you are interested in doing additional measurements, I have heard rd that the Santilli Foundation can provide some of the necessary funds." Well, no. I am an honest researcher, which means I cannot guarantee that my results would support Santilli. Since he believes that research which he supports belongs to him, I'm not willing to let him control my work. And, for what it's worth, I have done solar measurements which contradict his beliefs. Dew46to

Dew46to, the definition of "research" in physics is the pursuit of physical evidence irrespective of ethnic, personal or religious profiles. Consequently, far from being a researcher, you are a very dishonest person because you could not care less for physical evidence and does care to serve your ethnic interest on Einstein. JupiterSon

DemocritusSon - Cds88ow stated, "Santilli proved that ... light...experiences the IRS when air is below freezing ... and...IBS when the air ...is above boiling ". No. West and Amato showed IRS and IBS at temperatures of 21 and 54C. No other such experiments have been published. You have stated, "Ye values of temperatures below freezing and over boiling ... are clearly intended ton suggest the maximal values of Santilli IRS and IBS" but it has not been proved. If you disagree, show experiments. Vew578pf

I am not sure whether Vew578pf;s ignorance of Santilli's isorelativity is in good or bad faith. The Lorentz-Poincare'-Santilli isosymmetry on the iso-Minkowskian space re[resenting physical media establishes that Santilli IRS (IBS) is inversely proportional (directly proportional) to the temperature. A glance at the mechanics of Santilli isoshifts, Figure II.3, establish such an invariance in any case. Hence, the available measurements are amply sufficient to establish the existence of an IRS ()IBR) below freezing (above boiling(). The proof of the pudding as to whether Vew578pf is kosher or not is the following: since funds are available for new tests from the Santilli Foundation and the experiment is quite simple (see Figure II.5), WHY Vew578pf DOSENT DO IT??? DemocritusSon

The preceding messages are a documentation on how "the organized scientific crime on Einstein" managed to manipulate science for their ethnic interests for one full century. One starts with a fake theory based on the most hyperbolic conjectures conceived not to be verifiable with experiments on Earth provided they verify Einstein (Part I). This scam is immediately supported by another member of the organization from a different college, who is then supported by another and another one, thus achieving a fake acceptance via a capillary world wide organization of scientific crimes, all this while the same organization suppresses the shadow of scientific democracy in the United State of America and all developed countries and conducts a massive campaign of discreditation highly qualified dissident scientists and verified opposite experiments (Part II, and Refs. [86-89]). How long should the Attorney General continued to tolerate this documented. protracted, and organized misconduct with the abuse of billions of taxpayer money??Tew54oi

I am disturbed by these people who claim that the Doppler and Santilli effects are the same. Their fervor for Einstein is offensive be offensive because assuming we are that stupid! Hre57yo

It has been repeatedly claimed that the contribution of atmospheric refraction to the path length for light passing through the earth's atmosphere should be calculated, as it obviously affects the IRS experienced by such light. The effect has been calculated long since. The equivalent path length in the atmosphere (referenced to standard temperature and pressure) is called the Air Mass. For a zenith path it amounts to approximately 8.35 km if an isothermal model of the atmosphere is used, and is readily calculated from atmospheric pressure and the density of air (both well-known). Since the atmosphere is not not isothermal, and the value of gravity varies with altitude, use of the ICAO Standard Atmosphere (1976) allows a more accurate value of 8.44 km. Including the effects of refraction, the standard value for a horizon path is approximately 37.2 times the zenith path, or 320 km. It should be noted that this is much less than the 1,562 km claimed in [35] p.136. In fact, such a path length times the reported IRS of 0.2 nm/km only provides approximately 64 km of IRS, less than 1/3 of that required. Fre54io

Fre54io Fre54io, thank you for the data and the grace with which you present them, but we continued to have differences between your view and Ref. [36] you do not address. As indicated earlier, Prof. Santilli has dedicated his research life to the study of interior dynamical problems. In particular, his basic iso-Minkowskian geometry holds for "any" deviation fro the vacuum, thus including radiation belts, etc.. This implies a significant increase of the interior path length for both the vertical and the horizontal/tangential case. Additionally, said path lengths start from the strict vacuum and progressively reach the conditions of our atmosphere at sea level through a continuous increase of density and temperature which simply cannot be abstracted into an isothermal length without rather complex calculations not available in refereed journals at this moment. In short, the effective internal path lengths of our atmosphere, one for the Zenith and one for the horizontal/tangential case, are unknown at this writing. The sole experimentally measured value is the isoredshift measured by Prof. Santilli and his associates of sunlight for the transition from the Zenith to the horizon. In my view, theoretical predictions of the internal effective path length should be adapted to this measured value and not vice versa. Regards DemocritusSon

DemocritusSon commented, "In fact, the appearance of a relative speed between stationary objects implies the tacit assumption of the Doppler axioms of special relativity which is inapplicable within physical media." Such an appearance is called an Isoshift, and is used by Santilli to discredit the idea that distant objects are moving. As a friendly gesture, I advise you that defending Santilli by rejecting his theory is, shall we say, problematic. Please respond to the original question. Rationally. Zwe45ui

Zwe45ui, it appears you are outside serious science. Experiments are never used to "discredit" a theory, but to prove it to be right or wrong. The experiments on Santilli isoredshift have proved Zwicky hypothesis on Tired Light, thus removing (and not "discrediting") the Doppler effect as the cause of the cosmological redshift.

Message: DemocritusSon says "what we know for sure is that a blue laser light traveling in a 60' long steel pipe containing air at 2,000 psi experiences: 1) a clearly identifiable isoredshift when the pipe is below freezing temperature (achieved by submerging the pipe with ice)". How do we know that? When did Santilli perform such an experiment, and when did he publish it? If no such experiment was performed, and you cannot provide evidence to that effect, we know no such thing. Kew55oo

Hello Kew55oo, thanks for asking important questions in a respectful language. It's appreciated. I have done some checking. The tests were done when Prof. Santilli was the Chief Scientist of the publicly traded Magnegas Corporation via the Isoshift testing Station of Figure II.5 and the assistance of the technicians Gene West and Gino Amato. As indicated earlier, the test were done by simply immersing the 60 pipe in a cradle containing ice and then by enveloping the pipe with heating elements. A report was written for filing in the "News" section of the website of Magnegas Corporation. I check it, but the website has been redone and could not find it. Also, I know that Prof. Santilli wrote a short Letter as a follow up of paper []24]. I did reach Prof. Santilli for this Letter but he said that he is extremely busy at Thunder Energies Corporation and will look for that Letter whenever he has the time. I believe that the best solution is for you to redo the experiments since they are so simple and inexpensive. Regards DemocritusSon

DemocritusSon commented, "In short, the effective internal path lengths of our atmosphere, one for the Zenith and one for the horizontal/tangential case, are unknown at this writing." This, however, is untrue for zenith to nearly horizon. Laser measurements of the distance to the moon have been performed for more than 40 years over a broad span of elevation angles, and no anomalous range effects (other than the classic effect of index of refraction vs speed of light) has been discovered. Bsd34er

Hello Bsd34e, thanks for expressing your dissident view. Since you express it in a respectful language, it is my duty to respect your view. However, allow me to indicate, perhaps erroneously, that your view appears to be due to one century of physics solely dedicated to the exterior problem in vacuum. The interior problem within physical media, which is that for the elective path length here considered, is extremely complicated since it requires a new math, ket alone new physics. with all due respect, allow me to confirm my statement. I recommend you should study Santilli's formulations for interior problems. You will then feel yourself standing at the top of a much bigger mountain with a much broader scientific vista, believe ,me. Regards. DemocritusSon

Hre57yo commented, "I am disturbed by these people who claim that the Doppler and Santilli effects are the same." That was not the claim. The claim is that they are indistinguishable. The total effect is given in equation (4) of this section. And as DemocritusSon stated (although the comment was removed), a frequency shift is a frequency shift. There is no a priori means to determine whether an observed frequency shift is produced by a Doppler shift or an IRS or IBS. Bds45iu

Bds45iu, whether you are or you are not, your stand fits the the organized scientific agenda on Einstein that has manipulated science via fake arguments for personal or group gains. The claim that the Doppler and Santilli effects are "indistinguishable" is evidently moved for the intent on continuing to maintaining Einstein's special relativity in cosmology on the ground that Santilli'e effect cannot be distinguished from the Doppler effect. This is extremely narrow-minded and a-scientific. The use of the Doppler's effect implies the assumption of an hypothetical and hyperbolic assumption """not verifiable on Earth""" that all trillion and trillion galaxies in the universe move at a speed nonlinearly increasing from us at speed even much greater than c (wow, wow, wow!!). Santilli has honored the view by Einstein, Hubble, Hoyle, Zwicky, Fermi etc. that the universe is not expanding by performing """experiments on Earth""". Under these disparities, the hidden attempts via fake argument to support the preceding view is just out of any rationality and has no scientific value.. DemocritusSon

DemocritusSon, could you please review the main ideas in Prof. Santlli's reresentation of the cosmological redshift without expansion of the universe? Thanks Bds39dy

Dem ocritusSon commented, "The claim that the Doppler and Santilli effects are "indistinguishable" is evidently moved for the intent...etc". No. From equation 4 of this section, light can display both a Doppler shift and an Iso shift. Since there is no way to separate the two shifts based on the wavelength observation, the two are "indistinguishable". If I am wrong, please refer me to the part of Santilli's writings which apply. Stop attacking my motives and answer the question.Vwe56pyM/p>

Vwe56py, please accept my apologies. I am so contiguously exposed to scientific fraud that I end up seeing it when it's not there. For whatever its value, my vie w is that, """when solely considering the frequency shift,"""the Doppler and Santilli shifts cannot be distinguished. in that sense you are correct. However, the Doppler and Santilli effects can indeed be fully distinguishes when considering all the physical conditions of the shifts, such as the presence or the absence of relative motion, the temperature and density of the medium, etc. Also, the two effects are characterized by very different terms and dependence in law (4).Sincerely. The reason for our disagreement is that you tacitly refer to the preceding assumption (sole view of the shift), while I tacitly refer to the all important second case. I hope this will settle this important aspect. DemocritusSon

DemocritusSon has apologized for his misunderstanding, and I appreciate his honesty. Now. Per the Doppler-Santilli Isoshift (Equation 4), a radar gun looking at a stationary target will, because it interprets the Isoshift as a Doppler shift, report a target velocity which increases with range. After all, the radar gun has no knowledge of "all the physical conditions of the shifts", However, radar guns produce no such result. Why not? Vwe56py

I looked carefully at the exchange on the clear difference between the Doppler and Santilli effects and I believe that We56py is a member of the organized scientific crime on Einstein because: he/she wants to identify the clearly different Doppler and Santilli effects for the evident dishonest intent of maintaining the validity of Einstein special relativity under conditions (interior dynamics) in which its violation is brutal and beyond any possible doubt; for said dishonest intent, he/she uses the dubbing "Doppler-Santilli isoshift" that is total nonsense since the word "isoshift" requires the lack of relative motion requested by Doper; he/she comes out with a test via lasers which is the sublimation of scientific corruption since a laser will evidently establish the lack of relative motion for Santilli isoshift and the presence of relative motion for the Doppler shift; etc. I believe that the apologies by Democritus Son are inappropriate since his clear differentiation of the two effects has been intentional twisted for anti-American and anti-social evil gains. What's astonishing is the fact that, after one century of this so dishonest manipulation of human knowledge, members of the organized scientific crime on Einstein keep dreaming that they can keep doing it. No wonder Prof. Santilli has filed a lawsuit at the U. S.federal Court against such an organized scientific crime. Lawsuit against Frank Israel et alKks44yt

I agree fully with Kks44yt. The arrogance by notorious organized interests on Einstein is simply puking.

I am simply shocked at the blindness of of contemporary Einstein';s fanatics push to such an external to ignore the consequences of the action by their ancestors one century ago. Is this gloomy scenario under duplication in the USA? cas96yu

<./p>I felt offended by Vwe56py since his Doppler-Santilli pseudo-unification to keep Einstein is so sick and wrong to assume I am that stupid to even consider it.Vds20tp

Is there any application of Prof. Santilli;s isoredshift besides the experimental verification of Zwicky's Tired Light?> Dww33oo

Yes, Dww33oo, there are several in various fields. That in medicine is the treatment of cancer without cutting the skin of a patience via the equipment of the figure

On the left there is a conventional laser as currently used in medicine, while on the right there is an identical laser whose light passes through a tube containing a gas (such as air) at a controlled pressure and temperature, thus allowing the achievement of resonating conditions at the point of intersection with evident improvement in the treatment. The industrial development of this new equipment was attempted by a U. S. company but, unfortunately for us, this ne technology was opposed by the establishment with foul means ordinary people because the alteration of the frequency of the laser in the right constitutes a clear and incontrovertible violation of Einstein's special relativity. Perhaps you should look at the post above by Kks44yt to have a glimpse of the ongoing collapse of ethics in science. DemocritusSon

In 2007, Santilli proposed solar measurements "of selected spectral lines of the Sun light in the transition from the Zenith to Sunset and from Sunrise to the Zenith", yet in [39] it was stated, "all scans show lack of frequency shift of the absorption lines as expected, because they are set by the chemistry of the atmosphere" which ignored all solar spectral lines. Why? And please, more addressing the question and less (false) assertions concerning my motives. Vds28pa

Vds28pa, thanks for the question, but I have difficulties in gulping its scientific meaning. All tests done by Prof. Santilli and his group [34-39] were intended to measure the isoshift of the frequencies of Sunlight and NOT its absorption by our atmosphere which is a totally different problem. JupiterSon.

In 1868, an emission line of helium was discovered in the sun's corona. In 1896, an identical (to within 0.1 Angstrom) line was discovered in laboratory helium. With an equivalent air mass of about 8.5 km, this implies an Isoshift factor (K) less than 1% of Santilli's experimental results. This cannot be a result of the Einstein Physics Conspiracy, since Einstein had not graduated from secondary school. Interior paths cannot explain two orders of magnitude difference. What can? Zzz22qq

Zzz22qq, thanks for your message. it requires the following clarifications.
Sun light isoshift
The isoshift of light emitted by the Sun is extremely complex because it requires first the identification of the isoblueshift (IBS- acquisition of energy) when light passes through the extremely hot chromosphere nest to the Sun surface and then the isoredshift (IRS loss of energy) when Sun light passes through rarefied cold areas surrounding the Sun. Consequently, the IRS of Sunlight is the difference between the IBS and the IRS and can indeed be very small as you indicate while providing a confirmation, rather than a rebuttal of Santilli isoshifts. Additionally, atoms in the Sun are exposed to extreme pressures under which the very conventional emission are in question. Consequently, your use of the IRS of Sunlight for the disproof of Santilli isoshifts is a sick political scheme deprived of any science whatsoever. Pure scam for personal greed.
Dismissal of"Einstein conspiracy"
Either you do not read things before throwing comments, or you read them carefully by you twist their content to pursue your non-scientific agenda.. Prof. santilli has always praised Einstein with statements such as "Einstein was Einstein," "Einstein was a True Scientist because he doubted of his own theory of gravitation, he believed that QM is incomplete," etc. H Also, Einstein opposed the scam on the expansion of the universe and opposed other scams perpetrated by his followers. States Prof. Santilli: "The name of Albert Einstein is the most exploited in history by his own followers."
Confirmation of conspiracy by Einstein followers
The existence of a century old, organized, world wide conspiracy by fanatic Einstein followers against any broadening of Einstein theories is now set in the dark side of the history of science because documented beyond any possible doubt.The conspiracy by Einstein followers against Prof. Santilli initiated in the 1980s when he was in the faculty of Harvard University under DOE support to study the broadening of the time reversal Einstein theory\ies for irreversible events such as all energy releasing processes. This organized conspiracy was initiated by Striven Weinberg, Shelly Glashow, Sidney Coleman, Irwing Shapiro, et al at Harvard, and b their brothers Herman Feshback, Robert Oppenheim and others at MI, see Prof. Santilli 1984 "Il Grande Grido" and its three volumes of documentation (available in the internet free of charge). This initial conspiracy in Cambridge, MA, was then propagated to all"brothers" around the world by causing incredible vexations, defamation and damages to Prof. Santilli and his family (had Prof. Santilli been a member of this ring, ooohhhh yeaaaaa, he would have been hailed to the sky, thus framing the amoral and asocial character of the conspiracy). At the advent of the internet, the organized conspiracy was continued by Arthur Rubin, David Epstein, Mark Bernstein and their brothers at Wikipedia with their slanderous "Articled" on Prof., Santilli broadening of Einstein theories not for the conditions considered by Einstein, but for much more complex conditions unknown at Einstein's times, thus confirming the existence of a true "organized scientific crime on Einstein theories." In fact, according to information gathered by an Investigative Agency, Arthur Rubin, David Epstein, Mark Bernstein and their brothers perpetrated the following chain of scientific crimes intended to support their slander of Prof. Santilli research:
1) They commissioned a :profile" of Prof. Santilli to dub his research as "fringe" and then use it in the Article;
2) They commissioned works to discredit Prof. Santilli discoveries, e,g,m they commissioned their brother, their brother, the "engineer" Joseph Calo of Brown University, RI< to discredit Prof. Santilli post Ph. D. research in "chemistry";
3) They had the audacity of requesting the annulment of formal sessions at international conferences on Prof. santilli';s discoveries;
4) They pressured Robert Brown and his brothers at the American Institute of Physics to terminate the publication of proceedings for all international, meeting admitting Prof. Santilli discoveries, as they did for two international meetings; and
5) They commissioned their brother Frank Israel, head of the Dutch Skeptic Society, to conduct a massive defamation campaign for years and years in Dutch, English, French and Italian of such a dimension and foul language to cause huge personal, scientific and financial damages not only to Prof. santilli,m but also to thousands of stockholders of publicly traded companies developing Prof. Santilli new technologies, see Lawsuit against Frank Israel et al.
The difference between you and me is that I would feel shame in belonging to such a sinister anti-American and asocial scientific crime, while you seems to be prod of it and try to defend it ! But then you should, look at the prophecy for your ring by Nostradamus.... JupiterSon

Kks44yt has failed to answer my question, instead criticizing me for calling attention to "a test via lasers which is the sublimation of scientific corruption". The irony of this claim is very high. Kks44yt is apparently unaware that the Internet backbone is fiber-optic with laser drivers. Using the Internet to denounce lasers as "corruption" seems ... odd. Is physics which works corrupt? So, one more time, "However, radar guns produce no such result. Why not?" Stop evading the question Fwq220up

This is another Einstein fanatics who has simply list his mind due to the crushing evidence of the inapplicability of Einstein's theories within physical media, while they wanted to keep exploit mankind via said theory to held for all the universe until the end of time... Just the idea that experimental papers such as [34-39] call lasers as "corrupt" is sick. Most of the experiments done by Prof. Santilli were indeed with lasers. JupiterSon

<>/p>

According to the Schroedinger equation of quantum mechanics, the energy eigenvalue is a constant

Hψ= Eψ,       E = Constant

Consequently Santilli isoredshift cannot exist because it requires a decrease of the energy. Swe67op

Swe67op, thanks for your important post. Your post deals with the exterior problem in vacuum and, as such, it is correct but entirely outside the field of this Debate which deals with the propagation of elm waves within physical media (interior problem) for which QM is inapplicable.for countless reasons (the former problem is conservative, the latter nonconservative, the former is time reversible, the latter is not, etc.). A serious representation of the problem underlying this Debate requires a representation of the physical medium itself which is totally ignored in your post. The sole known mathematically and physically consistent representation is that given by the Schroedinger-Santilli genoequation of hadronic mechanics for which the energy is a local quantity, thus being variable in passing to different points of the medium [1]

H*ψ = HTψ;= ETψ,

T = T(t, r, p, ψ, ...) = Diag(1/n12, 1/n22, 1/n32) eΓ( t, r, p, ψ. ...)

ET = Local Variable

About 90% of the readers of this Debate have the same problem, that of claiming the validity of QM for all possible conditions existing in the universe. They implement their view by by treating interior problems in the homogeneous and isotropic vacuum, by therefore eliminating the very physical characteristics they have to represent. JupiterDSon

I believe that physicists who do not see the above evidence on the inapplicability if QM within physical media either are ignorant of the covering hadronic mechanics, or they are crooks. Vds34pu

JupiterSon, I do not understand how the product is generalized in the left of the genoequation but it is conventional on the right for the energy. Lfd28cv

Hello Lfd28cv, thanks for your inquiry. The genoeigenvalue must be a genonumber, thus having the structure E' = EU, where U us the genounit U = 1/T> 0. Hence, its genoproduct by the genofunction yields the conventional product, E'*ψ = EITψ = Eψ. You got to study Santilli isonumbers used for time reversible interior problems, and then the broader genonumbers for irreversible interior problems as it is the case for the IRS [19,20] JupitertSon

Congratulations JupiterSon. Your clear rendering of Santilli's pretty advanced theories provided an excellent illustration of the reason Prof. Santilli should get the Nobel Prize in Physics. Awe5-uu

JupiterSon commented, " Just the idea that experimental papers such as [34-39] call lasers as 'corrupt' is sick." I have submitted a response which JupiterSon has suppressed, so I'll try again. As I specifically stated, it was Kks44yt who stated that a proposed laser test was "the sublimation of scientific corruption". I never stated that the papers referenced were corrupt, and I was objecting to Kks44yt's use of the term. Please reproach Kks44yt, and do not falsely blame me. Swe29up

Apologies are due, Swe29up. Howsever, we should,d have on record the fact that a number of tests with laser that brea corrupt, of course, in the "use" of the laser and noth in the laser itself. One of them was conducted by a corrupt guy at CCNY. The intent was to use the laser to "prove" (!!) that Santilli's magnecules do not exist (because they bother corrupt academia in the field). The corruption is in the fact that, by conception and industrial realization, Santilli's magnecules have a very weak bond as a necessary condition to allow full combustion. (gasoline has no full combustion because its bond is too stronh, see Santilli's U.S. patent on magnecules). The corruption, or ignorance, is in the use of notoriously destructive lasers in testing weakly bonded cluster's and then claim that they do not exist! My God what a corruption. JupiterSon.

EDITORIAL NOTRES. The windows at the end of the sessions can only accept short statements. as indicated in the opening notes, longer statements and pictures should be sent to our Editorial Office via Email admin(at)galileoprincipia(dot)org.

II.4. Removal of dark matter

As indicated in Section I.8, the conjecture of dark energy never achieved the intent for which it was proffered., that is, a representation of the deviation of the cosmological redshift of galactic stars from the redshift of the galaxy as a whole. It has also been proved in refereed journals that dark energy cannot such a a representation for the evident reason that individual STARS will experience no action from the conjectured dark matter due to its homogeneous distribution, while inhomogeneous ad hoc distribution cause a host of additional inconsistencies.

The lack of quantitative science is complemented by the fact that the anomalous redshift of galactic stars is "explained" via their alleged rotation, as claimed in numerous papers published in the best scientific journals in the field.

A paradoxical situation then emerges from the well known fact that the Doppler shift is proportional to v/c, Eq. (2),, where c = 300 x 106 Km./s. Consequently, in order to have any measurable effect, the tangential speed of rotating galactic stars should be of the order of at least 100,000 Km/s, namely, to have rotations fully visible in telescopes, against clear evidence that no such rotation is visible in all recorded astronomical views.

These paradoxical absence of quantitative science confirm the view that the conjecture of dark matter was conceived and launched world wide for the untold, but implied intent of derailing attention from the lack of validity of Einstein's special relativity within the gaseous medium filling up galaxies that are clearly visible in telescopes.

Santilli isoredshift and isoblueshift have achieved the first and only known numerically exact and time invariant representation of the redshift anomaly of galactic stars as reported, for instance, if Figure I.7 v[30]. The representation was achieved via the experimentally verified ca[ability by light to release energy to cold gases, or acquire energy from hot gases.

Figure II.8: View of a galaxy showing the gaseous medium in its interior. The conjecture of dark matter never achieved the representation of the anomalous redshift of galactic stars, but did succeed in derailing attention on the inapplicability of special relativity within such a gaseous medium. Said inapplicability in favor of covering theories allows the first and only known numerically exact re[presentation of said anomalous redshift [<40].

In fact, the gaseous medium in the periphery of a galaxy is very thin. Consequently, the redshift of individual stars is close to that6 of the galaxy as a whole, thus implying a small isoredshift. We then pass to stars in central region of galaxies where the intergalactic gas becomes appreciable with consequentially appreciable Santilli isoredshift allowing a numerical representation of the central part of Figure 7. Finally, we pass to stars in regions close to the galactic center containing hot gases with ensuing Santilli isoblueshift which provides a numerical representation of the dip of Figure 7 (see, Ref., [40)] for details).

Santilli isoredshift and isoblueshift provide experimental data on the physical characteristics of the gas filling up galaxies, under the condition of accepting the rather vast experimental evidence establishing the inapplicability of Einstein's special relativity within physical media. ZeusSon

More and more evidence is emerging against cold dark matter as it is conceived by current cosmological models (lambda-CDM), therefore more and more scientists are publicly questioning its existence. It may be worth to mention one of the last researches in this field, that can be found in the paper "A whirling plane of satellite galaxies around Centaurus A challenges cold dark matter cosmology", signed by astrophysicists and astronomers from renowned institutions, which concludes that systems of dwarf galaxies orbiting a bigger galaxy on an orderly thin plane (instead of random motion, as predicted by the standard model) are likely to be pretty common in the Universe, and behave in a way inconsistent with the presence of dark matter (that should make most of the mass of the galaxy itself, according to the standard model). The paper itself can be read at this link: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1802.00081.pdf Xsa564oy

Thank you, Xsa564oy. In fact, the scientific community is coming back more and more to its senses on this fake science, as you can also see also from the recent release https://news.uci.edu/2018/02/01/distant-galaxy-group-contradicts-common-cosmological-models-simulations/. However, you fail to mention the one and only quantitative representation of the anomalous redshift of individual galactic stars for which the sark matter sake was intended, that based on experiments on Earth, by Prof. Santilli, Ref. [40] http://www.thunder-energies.com/docs/dark-matter-2015.pdf I hope for your own sake that this omission is not due to the fact that Santilli numerically exact and time invariant representation of said anomalies requires the abandonment of special relativity within physical media in favor of the covering Santilli isorelativity [1]. ZeusSon

I believe that dark matter is a full "fake science" because orchestrated by an organized ruing of Einstein fanatics under Wikipedia and the APS support to keep Einstein where he does not belong, the gas in the interior of galaxies. Santilli;s exact rep[resonation of the anomalous redshift of individual stars compared to the redshift b of the galaxy as a whole http://www.thunder-energies.com/docs/dark-matter-2015.pdf is grossly mistreated by said organized ring currently in control of our science with our public money because requiring departures from SR within inter-galactic media in favor of covering theories. That;s simply shameful. Wyr96hp

Please explain to a non-expert how Prof. Santilli's isoshifts represent the experimental data of Figure I.7

and please explain why their representation is impossible with the hypothesis of dark matter. Thank you. Yre74pt

Yre74pt, thanks for your important inquiry. Prof. Santilli is the leading expert in the field. Here is the requested explanation to my best. The r cosmological redshift of individual galactic star is the result of the following main contributions:
INTERNAL ISOREDSHIFT FOR PERIPHERAL GALACTIC STARS
Galaxies are filled up by a cold gas in their peripheral regions Therefore, galactic stars in that region experience a first isoredshift caused by the propagation of their light according to Eq. (4) within that medium

Z1 = K1d1,

where d1 is the travel of light within said innergalactic medium. With the decrease of the distance from the galactic center, there is an increase of the density of the gas that implies an increase of the isoredshift precisely as expressed by the central-right part of Figure I.7. hence, 1 is a function of said density as well as of other data. INTERNAL ISOBLUESHIFT FOR CENTRAL GALACTIC STARS
In the vicinity of their center, galaxies are filled up of a dense gas at high temperature that, according to Santilli's isoshifts, causes an isoblueshift also according to law (4) and we shall write

Z2 = - K2d2

where K2 also depends of density and temperature and d2 is the distance covered by the light of the considered star in that medium.
EXTERNAL GALACTIC ISOREDSHIFT
After leaving the galaxy, star light propagates within the inter-galactic medium which is much thinner compared to the inner-galactic medium but, at very low temperature thus causing an isofredshift also according to law (4) that we write

z3 = + K3 d3,

where k3 is Santilli's constant for the innergalactic medium and d2 is the distance from the galaxy to us according to Hubble's law.
TOTAL GALACTIC ISOREDSHIFT
The total cosmological redshift for peripheral galactic stars is then given by

Zperal stars = + K1 d1 + K3 d3

in which the first term is essentially generally increasing with the decrease of the distance from the galactic center. By contrast, the total cosmological redshift for central galactic stars is given by

Zcenter stars = - K2d3 + K3d3

DOPPLER CONTRIBUTION?
Of course the above total isoshifts should be complemented with the conventional Doppler contribution in accordance with Santilli law ((4) and we have for perpheral stars

Zperal stars = + K1 d1 + K3 d3 + v/c

However, such a contribution is proportional to v/c and, as such, it is ignorable due to the implausibility that entire galaxies can move at relativistic speeds. The impossibility for the conjecture of dark matter to provide such a quantitative representation even in a minimal form should be excluded by any scientist with sanity of mind for countless reasons, for instance, because a uniformly distributed dark matter cannot have any impact on individual stars, in the event the distribution is adapted for one star you have inconsistencies for all other stars, etc..These are some of the reasons dark matter is dubbed "fake science."JupiterSon

I am simply shocked to see seemingly distinguished cosmologists representing galactic stars anomalies via the rotation of stars which is total nonsense because: to be appreciable from the Doppler conjecture z = v.c, the tangential speed of stars has to be of the order of c (!!!); in the event the rotation is in a plane perpendicular to the distance, there is no redshift; if the rotation is at an angle the redshift is nonsense compared to the measured redshift; etc. Yet, the best journals in astrophysics keep accepting such nonsense. Why?? Cfd28pu

Cfd28pu, thanks for the return to sanity [89]. The most hyperbolic and non-sense conjecture are globally accepted provided that they verify Einstein special relativity, while all other studies, including contrary experiments, are discredited by "organized academic, financial and ethnic interests on Einstein" [86]. JupiterSon

EDITORIAL NOTE: we solicit contributions in the field.

II.5. Removal of dark energy

As recalled in Section I.8, the conjecture that the universe is filled up with a mysterious dark energy never achieved a quantitative representation of the the expansion of the universe, let the acceleration of said expansion, for which it was proffered.

The resulting paradoxical character of the case is established by the well known evidence that, according to Einstein, energy is the source of gravitational attraction and definitely not repulsion. Consequently, in the event filled up with dark energy, the universe should contract and positively not expand.

Santilli numerically exact and time invariant representation of Hubble's law (1) via experimental verifications on Earth of Zwicky's tired light (Section II.3) eliminates completely any need for the dark energy, again, under the condition of admitting the vast experimental evidence establishing the inapplicability of Einstein's special relativity within physical media at large, and within the intergalactic medium in particular. ZeusSon

Dark energy is one of the most fascinating mysteries of contemporary science because it stimulates the imagination to seek new frontiers. Gqw60hk

I am astonished to see the continued support by the Wikipedia-academic complex of the conjecture of dark energy. The evident intent is to support the validity of Einstein's special relativity in cosmology via the use of its Doppler xiom to represent the measured cosmological redshift. However, his is done in oblivion of the failure of all attempts to reach a quantitative explanation for the expansion of the universe, let alone its acceleration, beginning with Einstein who called his failed attempt "the biggest blunder of my life." I believe that dark matter is fake science for many reasons such as: energy causes gravitational "attraction" rather than repulsion, as established by Einstein; galaxies can experience no dynamical effect when immersed within a uniformly distributed substance, no matter what's its nature; dark energy implies a return to the Middl Ages with Earth at the center of the universe because of the acceleration of the expansion, as established by Santilli (Part I); etc. Bds36po

Yes, I agree that dark matter is fake science because it was conceived in support of a chain of failed conjectures on the expansion of the universe without being experimentally verifiable in Earth, thus achieving acceptance via coordinated academic propaganda. Fww44uu

I believe that the most serious science in cosmology has been done by Santilli who has proved at the mathematical, theoretical and experimental levels that special relativity does not hold) within physical media at large [1,34-39,86]), including the intergalactic medium which is mostly composed by hydrogen at absolute zero degrees temperature. In fact, special relativity cannot be consistently defined within physical media, while no serious direct experimental verification is conceivable due to the absence of inertial reference frames caused by resistance, the local variation of the speed of light (when media are transparent....), and other reasons [1,86]. The validity of special relativity in cosmology is kept by organized propaganda of unprecedented capillary and world wide character. Santilli's disproof of the Doppler axiom within the intergalactic medium and the experimentally verified loss of energy by galactic light to said medium without relative motion (IRS), confirm the rejection by Einstein, Humble, Hoyle, Zwicky, Fermi, and others of the expansion of the universe and all subsequent conjectures, including the elimination of dark energy. Ads24ii

EDITORIAL NOTE: we solicit contributions in the field.

PART III:
THE NEW ERA IN COSMOLOGY

III.1. The need of antimatter galaxies for the stability of a non-expanding universe

The admission of the inconsistencies of the conjecture of the expansion of the universe and of the chain of related conjectures (Part I), combined with the experimental verification on Earth on the lack of such an expansion (Part II), create again problem of the stability of a stationary universe addressed by Einstein, Hoyle, Hubble, Zwicky, and other famous scientists.

As it is well known to serious historians of science, said problems resulted to have no consistent solution, via 20th century sciences due to insurmountable difficulties in turning conventional gravitational attraction into a form of gravitational repulsion needed to prevent the collapse of a universe solely composed by matter galaxies. The best known case is the attempt by Einstein of adding a cosmological constant to his field equations which Einstein called The biggest blunder of my life.

Following decades of studies of the problem, Santilli's conclusion is that the sole consistent possibility for the universe to be stable is to assume that it is composed of matter and antimatter galaxies under mutual gravitational repulsion [61]. In fact, such a conception explains not only the stability of the universe, but also the large mutual distances existing in between galaxies [52].

It should be indicated that Santilli [51] confirmed the widely accepted expectation of matter-antimatter repulsion at all levels of study, including Newtonian mechanics, classical mechanics, quantum mechanics and gravitational theories. Ref. [51] also proposed a resolutory test consisting in the comparative measure of the gravity of electrons and positrons in a horizontal supervacuum and super cooled tube (see also the technical proposal (see Ref. [53] and original papers quoted therein).

Figure III.1: One of the diagrams of Ref. [52] showing that the gravitational repulsion between matter and antimatter galaxies tends to be zero at infinite mutual distances, thus implying that matter and antimatter galaxies repel each other to such a distance for which the acceleration of gravity is essentially null, thus explaining not only the stability of the universe, but also the very large mutual distances between galaxies.

The existence of antimatter galaxies is dismissed by orthodox physicists on grounds that "they are not predicted by Einstein's special and general relativities." The non-scientific character of this view can be easily seen from the fact that antimatter was predicted by P. A.M. Dirac [54] decades following the formation by Einstein of his relativities. Therefore, the use of said relativities to dismiss the existence of antimatter galaxies without credible arguments is scientifically vacuous. JupiterSon

e: From a historical point of view, it is important to remark that Einstein never acknowledged the idea of an expanding Universe, but he didn't like, in his first model, the use of a cosmological constant that had to represent a sort of "repulsive force" needed to avoid collapse in a stationary Universe. The arbitrary nature of this constant, that ruined the elegance of his field equations, led him ultimately to his famous admission of it as "the biggest blunder of my life". It is somehow funny that nowadays that constant has been reintroduced by "mainstream cosmology" and considered non-zero, changing its name to "dark energy" (and claiming that "Einstein was right even when he was wrong!"), but leaving all the problems that the German physicist wanted so much to avoid. It must be stressed that he also tried later to develop another static model that kept into account Hubble's discoveries (not considering the redshift as proof of expansion), but never s acceded to solve inconsistencies due to the consideration of the sole matter galaxies in his model. It looks like the introduction of antimatter galaxies (with matter-antimatter repulsion) as suggested by Santilli can indeed solve this and other inconsistencies and lead to a new era in Cosmology. Swt37or

Thank you Swt37or. Please note that, according to unverified rumors, Enrico Fermi apparently reported a strong disagreement between Einstein and the physicists of the Manhattan project on the expansion of the universe that you will never see in print. JupiterSon

EDITORIAL NOTE: We solicit contributions in the field.

III.2. The devastations caused by antimatter asteroids

The existence of antimatter asteroids is dismissed by orthodox physicists on grounds of the above indicated dismissal of the existence of antimatter galaxies. However, there exists a series of evidence that Earth has been devastated in the past by the annihilation of antimatter asteroid in our atmosphere (see Section III.3 for more details), as it is the case for: the 1908 Tunguska explosion in Siberia; the 1871 Chicago fire; and numerous explosions in the skies of Russia and other countries treated in the figures below. This evidence mandates a serious study of antimatter asteroids that, in turn, can only originate from antimatter supernova explosions, that also in turn, can only occur in antimatter galaxies.

Hence, the evidence on the existence of antimatter asteroids is clear evidence on the existence of antimatter galaxies in the universe which, as shown by Santilli and reviewed below, cannot be seen with ordinary telescopes due to the anti-isomorphic character of antimatter compared to matter established by matter-antimatter annihilation.

Another reason for the dismissal of antimatter asteroids is the expectation that they should be repelled by the gravitational field of Earth. However, S. Beghella-Bartoli [55] has shown that, under the appropriate value of the kinetic energy for a given trajectory intersecting Earth, antimatter asteroids can indeed collide with Earth, although matter-antimatter repulsion explains the reason for the numbness of antimatter asteroids penetrating in our atmosphere to be much smaller than the number of matter asteroids.

Figure III.2: An image of the 1908 Tunguska explosion in Siberia, Russia, that was the equivalent of one thousand Hiroshima nuclear bombs and devastated an area the size of New England without any crater. To maintain Einstein relativities, orthodox physicists claim that the explosion was caused by an 'ice comet.' Such a view is soon dismissed by the documentary evidence that, two days following the explosion, people in London, England, could read newspapers at midnight without artificial light [56]. This evidence establishes that the Tunguska explosion ionized the entire Earth atmosphere, which ionization can only be credibly explained by the annihilation of an antimatter asteroid in the atmosphere, with ensuing emission of electromagnetic radiations of all frequency without any crater.

Figure III.3 A view of the Hiroshima 1871 Chicago Fire [57] that followed a large explosion in the sky without any crater. The origin of the fire as being due to the annihilation of an antimatter asteroid in Chicago atmosphere is supported by the documented fact that 'bricks were melted,' the body of victims were gasified, and there were other occurrences due to extremely high temperatures that can be solely explained and there was additional evidence solely due to extremely high temperatures.

Figure III.4: An illustration from Ref. [58] of one of the numerous fireballs in the skies of Russia and other countries around the world all occurred with large explosions and emission intense electromagnetic radiation without any crater on the ground. These features can be solely explained on serious scientific grounds, that is with equations, as being due to the annihilation of antimatter asteroids in our atmosphere because matter asteroids do not explode, they actually cool down when entering in the dense part of our atmosphere and hit the ground.

The Editorial Board of this Debate shares the view on the need for systematic studies in the field because, in the event our Country is hit by an antimatter asteroid the size of a football, all civilian, industrial and military communications will be disrupted for days due to the emission of very hard electromagnetic radiations in all frequencies. ZeusSon

Physics used to be the admission of evidence. It is simply astonishing to see the dismissal of evidence by Einstein's theories perhaps because banking on diversified support. Bfs92yt.

A number of scholars believe we are living during the biggest scientific obscurantism in the history of mankind caused by the maintaining of Einstein's theories for the most extreme conceivable conditions expectedly until the end of time. JupiterSon

EDITORIAL NOTE: we solicit contributions in the field.

III.3. Matter-antimatter annihilation

The most important experimental evidence on antimatter is that matter-antimatter annihilate at contact of each other, with the ensuing entire transformation of their masses to electromagnetic radiation of all possible frequencies without the emission of massive particles. This evidence was assumed by Santilli at the foundation of his representation of antimatter [41], as reviewed in Section III.4.

To understand the energy released in matter-antimatter annihilation, we should recall that only about 10 grams of Uranium were converted into energy in the Hiroshima explosion according to Einstein's equivalence law E = mc2. Consequently, the annihilation in our atmosphere of a one Kg antimatter asteroid causes an explosion about 100 times the Hiroshima explosion. The devastation caused by bigger antimatter asteroids is then evident.

Figure III.5: A pictorial view of the majestic event in nature caused by matter-antimatter annihilation.

It is generally believed that matter-antimatter annihilation produces a shower of massive particles, generally assumed to be mesons and leptons as well as electromagnetic radiations of all possible frequencies, including photons. The reader should be aware that Santilli's studies have disproved this belief, by proving that it violates a number of theorems, such as the PCT theorems and basic symmetries, as reviewed below. JupiterSon

EDITORIAL NOTE: we solicit contributions in the field.

III.4. Isodual mathematics

The main principle in Santilli's decades of studies of antimatter [8-10, 51, 59-70] has been the selection of formulations suitable for a quantitative representation of matter-antimatter annihilation. The adoption of this principle readily identified the inapplicability of 20th century sciences for a consistent representation of antimatter.

In particular, the insufficiency resulted to be due to the use of 20th century mathematics because the use of the same mathematics for the representation of both matter and antimatter emerged as being incompatible with matter-antimatter annihilation.

These initial studies established that a quantitative representation of matter-antimatter annihilation was solely possible under the use of mathematics that are anti-homomorphic to each at all their levels. But a mathematics which is anti-homomorphic to 20th century mathematics did not exist in the 1980's. Consequently, the new mathematics had to be constructed. Physical theories for antimatter could be constructed only following the availability of the new mathematics.

While being a member of the faculty of the Department of Mathematics of Harvard University in the early 1980's under DOE support, Santilli constructed a basically new mathematics for the representation of antimatter, today known as Santilli's isodual mathematics [8-10] (see monograph [51] for a comprehensive presentation). The new mathematics is indeed anti-homomorphic to conventional mathematics and its main branches can be outlined as follows:

III.4.1. Isodual map [9].
The new mathematics was essentially constructed via the systematic application of the following map, called isoduality and indicated with the upper index "d" to the totality of the quantities Q(t, r, v, *psi;, ...) and their operations used for the treatment of matter

Q(t, r, v, ψ, ...) → Qd(td, rd, vd, ψd, ...) = -Q(-t, -r, -v, -ψ, ...)    (5),

without any exception. In fact, the use of one single quantity in the treatment of antimatter which is not anti-homomorphic to the corresponding quantity used for matter is sufficient to prohibit a consistent representation of matter-antimatter annihilation.

Note that the term "isodual" denotes a conjugation characterized by the word "dual" under the preservation of the axioms of conventional mathematics denoted by the Greek prefix iso.

III.4.2. Isodual numbers [9].
They are characterized by the new basic unit, called isodual unit,

1d = - 1 = - 1,    (6)

with ensuing isodual real, complex or quaternionic numbers nd = n1d = - n, isodual multiplication nd xd md = - ndmd and consequential isodual operations for the division, power, square root, etc., under which 1d is indeed the basic unit of the new theory, because 1dxd nd = nd xd 1d = nd, and all axioms of a numeric field are verified. Consequently, Santilli's historical discovery in Ref. [9] has been the identification of the fact that the axioms of a numeric field do not require that the basic unit must be positive, since it can indeed be negative, provided that all operations are reformulated accordingly. This discovery is at the ultimate foundation of the new theory of antimatter and of the ensuing new era in cosmology.

III.4.3. Isodual functional analysis [10].
It is given by the isodual image of conventional functions and other operations, whose basic principle is that the final numeric result must be an element of the base isodual field, namely, isodual functions must have the form fd(rd) - - f(-r)

III.4.4. Isodual differential calculus, [10]. It is given by the isodual image of the differential calculus for matter ddrd, and related isodual derivative. Note that the isodual differential coincides with the conventional differential by Santilli conception,

ddrd ≡ dr,    (7)

and this explains the reason the new isodual calculus was not discovered since Newton's time until memoir [19] of 1996.

III.4.5. Isodual Minkowski space [10].
It is given by the new space Md(xd, ηd, Id) which characterized by the isodual image of the conventional Minkowski space for matter M(x, &eta', I) where x denotes spacetime coordinates, η = Diag. (1, 1, 1,1 -1) denotes the Minkowski metric, and I = Diag (1, 1, 1, 1) is the basic unit. Note that the isodual line element is now given by

xd2d = (xd ×dηd×dxd)1d ≡ x2,    (8)

where the multiplication by 1d is necessary for the isodual line element to have values in the isodual field. Note that the isodual line element (8) coincides with the conventional line element also by Santilli's conception.

The understanding of Santilli's studies on antimatter requires a knowledge of the fact that representation space of antimatter coexist with that of matter while being totally different from the latter.

III.4.6. Isodual Lie theory and symmetries [10].
They are characterized by Hermitean generators X = X verifying the Lie-Santilli isodual product

[Xd, Yd]d = YdxdXd - Xd xd Yd ≡ [X, Y]    (9)

and related Lie-Santilli isodual theory formulated on isodual spaces over an isodual numeric field and elaborated via the isodual functional analysis and isodual differential calculus.

Note again that The Lie-Santilli isodual bracket (9) coincides with the conventional Lie bracket also by Santilli central conception, and these identify the deep meaning of the term "isoduality."

Additionally, Santilli has discovered a basically new symmetry which can be solely identified via the use of the isodual mathematics and it is at the foundation of the Dirac equation as well as of Santilli new cosmology. The new symmetry is called IsoSelfDuality (USD) [10, 51] and it is simply given by the invariance under isoduality. As an example, Pd(3.1) does not verify ISD, although P)3.1) x Pd(3.1) does verify ISD since each symmetry is transformed into the other, resulting in a total invariance.

III.4.7. Isodual Lorentz-Poincare'-Santilli symmetry [10, 29, 61].
Santilli constructed the isoduality of the Lie theory for the primary purpose of constructing the isodualities of spacetime symmetries, by reaching in this way the isodual rotational symmetry SOd(3), the isodual spin symmetry SUd(2), the isodual Lorentz symmetry SOd(3.1) and finally, the isodual Lorentz-Poincare'; symmetry Pd(3.1) which is the fundamental symmetry of the new theory of antimatter.

It should be stressed that isodual mathematics is solely applicable to point-like abstraction of antimatter masses or particles. The representation of time reversal invariant systems of extended antimatter particles requires the covering isodual isomathematics, and the representation of their irreversible counterpart requires the broader isodual genomathematics, while the most general conceivable mathematics for antimatter is given by Santilli isodual hypermathematics which is particularly suited for multi-valued *(rather than multi-dimensional) formulations [51]. JupiterSon

EDITORIAL NOTE: we solicit contributions in the field.

III.5. Isodual theory of antimatter

After, and only after achieving the foundations of the new isodual mathematics, Santilli conducted decades of systematics studies on a new theory of antimatter which is applicable at all possible levels, from Newtonian mechanics to second quantization [8-10, 51, 59-70]. This new theory is today known as Santilli isodual theory of antimatter (see independent studies [71-85]) and its main branches can be outlined as follows:

III.5.1. Newton-Santilli isodual mechanics [10, 51, 62].
It is based on the Newton-Santilli isodual equations

md xd ddvd.ddtd = Fd(td, rd),    (10)

which are the first and only known, consistent, classical equations for antimatter and are manifestly anti-homomorphic to the conventional Newton's equations, as requested by matter-antimatter annihilation. The main aspects of the new mechanics follow via the use of isoduality (5).

III.5.2. Hamilton-Santilli isodual mechanics [10, 51, 62].
It is characterized by the anti-homomorphic image of conventional mechanics with basic Hamilton-Santilli isodual equations

ddrd/dddtdd Hd(td, rd)/*part;d pd -   , (11)

ddpd/dddtd - - *part;d Hd(td, rd)/dddrd    (12)

defined on the isodual Euclidean space [10] over the field of isodual real numbers [9]. Their derivation from a variational principle requires the knowledge of the isodual integral and other isodual operations.

III.5.3. Isodual special relativity [1, 10, 51, 64]
The new relativity is also given by the anti-homomorphic image of special relativity resulting from the systematic application of isodual map (5) to the totality of the physical quantities and their operation of the conventional special relativity. Equivalently, the new relativity for antimatter can be uniquely and unambiguously characterized by the Lorentz-Poincare'-Santilli isodual symmetry on the isodual Minkowski space over the field of isodual real numbers (for brevity, see Section 4 of Ref. [1] for the explicit form of the isodual axioms).

III.5.4. Isodual general relativity [1, 10, 29, 51.]
It is equally characterized by the isodual image of general relativity on the isodual Riemannian space over the field of isodual real numbers. Santilli's isodual general relativity provides the first and only known, consistent representation of the gravitational field of antimatter.

III.5.5 Isodual quantum mechanics [1, 10, 51].
It is characterized by the Schroedinger-Santilli isodual equation

Hdxdd) = Ed xdd) = - E |ψd) = - E }*psi;    (13)

and the Heisenberg-Santilli isodual equation

defined over the Hilbert-Santilli isodual space over the field of isodual complex numbers.

III.5.6. Dirac's equation [51].
Contrary to other quantum mechanical equations, isodual mathematics implies no structural change for the Dirac equation, except its re-interpretation as representing an electron and its antiparticle, the positron. Such a representation occurs in full first quantization without any need for the "hole theory" or second quantization, because the isodual theory allows the consistent representation of antimatter at the classical level, let alone that in first quantization. Most importantly, the Dirac equation verifies the symmetry under IsoSelfDuality (ISD) [51] which invariance persists at the cosmological level, as we shall see.

III.5.7. Basic features of antimatter [51].
Recall that, with the typical intuition of a genius, P. A. M. Dirac [54] conceived antimatter as having negative energy. Santilli has extended such a feature to all other characteristics and proved that, all characteristics of antimatter must be opposite those of matter as a necessary condition to represent matter-antimatter annihilation. Hence, antimatter possesses: negative time trd = 0 t, namely, the evolution is backward in time compared to our evolution; negative coordinates, negative energy, negative angular moments, etc.

III.5.8. Causality of negative characteristics [51].
As it is well known to experts, Dirac understood that negative energies violate causality because they imply effects preceding the cause. Consequently, Dirac was forced to invent the "hole theory" that more recently, was replaced by second quantization, in an attempt of circumventing the problem of causality.

One of the most important achievements of Santilli's isodual theory of antimatter is that of resolving the problem of causality for negative energies. In essence, Dirac's analysis was based on the mathematics available at his time, conventional mathematics. Consequently, negative energies were measured with the conventional positive units of energy, with ensuing violation of causality laws.

By contrast, a necessary condition for consistency is that the isodual map has to be applied to the totality of the quantities and their operations used for matter, thus including the units of measurements. It then follows that the isodual time td = - t must be measured with the isodual unit sd = - s, the isodual energy Ed = - E must be measured with the isodual unit Jd = -, etc. This implies a fully causality for antimatter with negative physical characteristics.

In fact, antimatter evolving backward in time when measured with negative units of time is as causal as matter moving forward in time when measured with positive units of time. Similarly, antimatter with negative energy when measured with negative units is as causal as matter with positive energy when measured with positive units, and the same causal behavior holds for all other characteristics of antimatter. All causality problems emerge when antimatter quantities are measured with matter units and vice versa.

III.5.8. Experimental verifications [51].
The isodual theory of antimatter verifies all available experimental data on antimatter available to date, those at the particle level, because isoduality on the Hilbert-Santilli isodual spaces

ψ*t, r) → ψd(td, rd) - = = ψ(-t, -r)   , (15)

is equivalent to charge conjugation on a Hilbert space

ψ*t, r) → ψc(t, r) = - ψ(t, r)   , (16)

except for appropriate redefinitions since measured quantities such as the vacuum expectation values are invariant under isoduality

(ψ | Q | ψ) ≡ (ψd | ×dQd ×d | ψd) 1d   , (17)

where one should notice the multiplication by the isodual unit necessary for isodual values to be elements of an isodual field as it was the case for isodifferentials (7), isodual line elements (8), Lie-Santilli isodual product (9), etc.

III.5.9. Structural differences between isoduality and charge conjugation [51].
The most important difference between charge conjugation and isoduality is that, according to the former, antimatter exist in the same spacetime of matter while, according to the latter, antimatter exists in a physically different, yet co-existing space, the isodual spacetime xd - (td, rd). Alternatively we can say that charge conjugation is an inner automorphism, while isoduality is an outer automorphism.

The above differentiation has fundamental implications at all remaining aspects of antimatter. JupiterSon

This fancy isodual quantum mechanics can be easily proved to be inconsistent, for instance, by showing that the total energy of the pi-o meson is null when composed by a and its antiparticle, contrary to the well known value of its rest energy of 139.57018(35) MeV/c2. Brs93ii

I am afraid that your fanciness is due to ignorance. Isoselfdual bound states acquire the time of the observer, thus having positive energy in our world and negative energy in the antimatter world [51], , but I exclude you can understand this with your posture of throwing judgment with zero knowledge of the field. JupiterSon.

EDITORIAL NOTE: we solicit contributions in the field.

III.6. Isodual light

III.6.1. Santilli hypothesis of the isodual light.
It is popularly believed that the conventional light is the only light existing in the universe or that, since we only see images caused by conventional light, other forms of light do not exist. This popular belief originates from the belief that there exist only one type of photons γ due to its invariance under charge conjugation or equivalently, from the belief that the Hilbert space describes the entire universe.

At the First International Conference on Antimatter held in Sepino, Italy, in June 1996, Santilli delivered an invited plenary lecture in which he presented, for the first time, the hypothesis that antimatter emits a new light, he called 'isodual light', which is physically different than ordinary light in an experimentally verifiable way. [63].

III.6.2. Experimental verifications and motivations
The isodual light is expected to be emitted by antimatter stars that, in turn, can only exist in antimatter galaxies. Therefore, verifications [] for existence of antimatter galaxies are experimental verifications [60,70,83-85] on the existence of the new isodual light. Santilli global conception begins to be seen from the fact that antimatter galaxies are necessary for the stability of the universe (Part II).

It should also be recalled that that both astronauts and cosmonauts have systematically seen small flashes of light in our upper atmosphere when in darkness. these flashes of light can be best explained as being due to the annihilation of antimatter cosmic rays (essentially antiprotons), thus providing corroborating evidence on the existence of isodual light.

Santilli's hypothesis of the new isodual light and therefore, of the new isodual photons γd, is based on the facts that: the conventional Hilbert space can solely describe the conventional matter in a consistent way, while antimatter can only be consistently described by the inequivalent isodual Hilbert space; the isodual transformation mapping one Hilbert space into the other is basically new, thus without pre-existing disproofs; and other arguments.

Above all, Santilli proposed the study of the new isodual photon because all its characteristics are opposite that of the ordinary photons, thus being physically different than the latter on a number of counts.

Finally, Santilli proposed the isodual photon to avoid the violation of the novel fundamental invariance of Dirac's equation, that under IsoSelfDuality (ISD). This issue an be easily seen from the currently believed annihilation of an electron and a positron into one photon

e+ + e- → γ   , (18)

whose l.h.s. verifies the basic ISD, while the r.h.s. violates it. Alternatively, the consistent representation of the l.h.s. via the Dirac equation can only occur in the product of the conventional and isodual Hilbert spaces, while the r.h.s. is assumed to require only the conventional Hilbert space, under which conditions annihilation (zzzz) is impossible in favor of the more adequate expression

e+ + e- → γ + γd   , (19)

that verifies ISD in both its l.h.s and r.h.s. Alternatively, we can say that the representation of both sides of annihilation (63] requires the product of the conventional and isodual Hilbert space, thus rendering possible the annihilation itself.

III.6.3. Representation of matter-antimatter annihilation.
We are now finally in a position to indicate the representation of matter-antimatter annihilation by the isodual theory of antimatter on a number of grounds [61], such as: the validity of the invariance under ISD prior and after annihilation; the use of the same product of representation spaces before and after annihilation; and other features [1,51].

At a deeper level, the mechanism triggering matter-antimatter annihilation is particularly intriguing. In fact, at contact, the total time of a matter-antimatter system is identically null, as a consequence of which matter-antimatter can only annihilate into all possible frequencies of light.

The implications of the first and only known quantitative representation of matter-antimatter annihilation are rather deep, among which we indicate:

A) Matter and antimatter can only annihilate into light without any possible massive residues.

B) Matter-antimatter annihilation emits two forms of light, the conventional and the isodual light.

C) The annihilation of equal masses of matter and antimatter causes the emission of electromagnetic radiations in all possible frequencies. JupiterSon

EDITORIAL NOTE: we solicit contributions in the field.

III.7. Isodual telescopes

The isodual telescope is the new optical instruments capable of focusing images caused by antimatter light, and it is internationally known as the Santilli telescope (international patent pending) because first conceived by Prof. Santilli in 2012 (see the AIP publication [66]), first constructed in 2013, and then regularly produced and sold by the U. S. publicly traded company

The most important features of the Santilli telescope are the following (see Section 4 of Ref.[1,51] and large literature for a detailed presentation)

.

1) Antimatter light is repelled by a matter gravitational field..

Figure III.6. The isodual theory of antimatter predicts that matter and antimatter experience a gravitational repulsion. This implies in particular the repulsion of antimatter light by a matter gravitational field as illustrated in this figure. Said repulsion is due to a number of reasons, including the fact that antimatter light carries negative energy as originally conceived by Dirac [54]. Note that matter-antimatter gravitational repulsion is generally accepted by contemporary academia and a number of tests are under study, including the resolutory test proposed by Santilli p60] (see the independent studies [73,74].

2) The index of refraction of antimatter light is opposite that of matter light.

Figure III.7. As indicated since the beginning of Part III, a necessary condition for a consistent representation of matter-antimatter annihilation is that all characteristics of matter are opposite that of matter without any known exception. This implies that the index of refraction of antimatter light must be opposite that of matter light as depicted in this figure.

3) Images caused by antimatter light can only be focused via convex lenses.

Figure III.8. Recall that the Galileo telescope and all related optical instrument focus images caused by matter light via 'convex' lenses. In view of the negative character of the index of refraction, images caused by antimatter light can be solely focused by Santilli telescope with 'concave' lenses [66].

4) The need for the Galileo and Santilli telescopes to be used in pairs.

Figure III.9. No focusing of the Santilli telescope with our eyes is possible due to its convex lens. Therefore, the only way to use the Santilli telescopes is in pair with a Galileo telescope of the same diameter and focusing distance. The above picture presents (from the top) 70 mm, 100 mm, 150 mm and 200 mm pairs of Galileo and Santilli telescopes in production and sale by the U. S. publicly traded c company Thunder Energies Corporation (www.thunder-energies.com) The R. M. Santilli Foundation (santilli-foundation.org.) has pairs of Galileo and Santilli telescopes available at no cost to qualified astrophysicists anywhere in the world willing to repeat the detections indicated in the next section.

4) How to focus the Santilli telescope.

Figure III.10. A view of the design of the Santilli telescope according to the novel isodual optics according to which curvatures and focal distance are the same but opposite those e of a Galileo telescope with the same diameter 9international patent pending).

Figure III.1. A close up view of the 70 mm pair of Galileo and Santilli telescopes with their extended focusers. Proper use of these telescopes requires first the focusing of the Galileo telescope for the desired distance, and then the transfer of the focuser data from the Galileo to the Santilli telescope. Focusing of the latter is assured by its construction according to the novel isodual optics for which all numerical values of the two telescopes are identical, yet conjugated via isoduality.

6) Antimatter light creates "dark images" on the background of a digital or film camera.

Figure III.12. In this picture we reproduce a picture from Ref.[67] depicting Santilli's first detection in scientific history of an antimatter galaxy in the Vega region of the night sky. This historical picture was obtained on September 15, 2012, but published only in 2014 due to incredible obstructions by various scientific journals opposing the publication of the discovery to such an extent of refusing to look into Santilli;s telescopes made available to the editors at no cost, exactly as done by Cardinal Roberto Ballarmino with fir the Galileo telescope four centuries ago. To understand the dark color of the streak, recall that the pixel of a digital camera carry a conventional 'positive' energy caused by the photoelectric effect. Since isodual photons carry 'negative energy, they annihilate the positive energy existing in pixels. Consequently, the image caused by antimatter light on a conventional digital or film camera are 'black'. Note that Santilli solely accepts "streaks of darkness" obtained under 126v seconds exposure asa possible candidate for antimatter galaxies, due to the insufficiency of "dots of darkness." This begins to illustrate the basic novelty of Santilli antimatter astrophysics over conventional, astrophysics.

7) No detection of antimatter light is currently possible in darkness.

Figure III.13. Since images caused by antimatter light are black, the proper detection of antimatter light requires a visible background with light luminosity proportional to the luminosity of the desired isodual image, in the sense that the detection requires a visible background, but its luminosity should be proportional to that of the desired image. For instance, the detection of an extremely faint antimatter light is not possible in a strongly lit background because the annihilation of the positive energy of the pixels by the very weak isodual photons is not sufficient to produce a detectable image.

Prof. Santilli conceived his telescope in such a way that natter light does not interfere with the antimatter image and vice versa. In fact, in the Galileo telescope, antimatter light is dispersed by the convex z lens into the internal walls of the telescope without causing interference in conventional images. Vice versa, matter light is dispersed by the concave lens into the wall of the Santilli telescope, thus creating no interference with the the image caused by antimatter light.

Since the detection of antimatter light cannot be effectively done nowadays in complete darkness, all detections of antimatter light reported in the next section were done in illuminated urban areas to assure the needed luminosity of the background. In the event detections have to be done at the top of a mountain or in space, an appropriate illumination is necessary to create the needed background.

The negative character of the index of refraction explains the fact that no antimatter galaxy has been detected prior to Santilli's discovery of the isodual telescope [66]. In fact, the totality of the telescopes currently available on Earth or in space are of Galileo type, thus being basically unable to detect antimatter light.

The human eye was created by nature to see images caused by matter light, thus having a convex iris. Consequently, we humans will never be able to see antimatter light. The only possibility of its detection is that via the use of digital cameras attached to Santilli telescopes.

As it is well known, light loses about 1/3 of its speed when passing through water. Due to the full democracy of the matter and antimatter worlds, the same occurs for antimatter light traveling trough antimatter water. The origin if such a decrease of speed is precisely due to the gravitational attraction of light by matter, as well as of the isodual light by antimatter. Along similar lines, it is possible to prove that the negative value of the index of refraction of antimatter light in a matter medium is due to matter--antimatter gravitational repulsion. JupiterSon

I believe it is stupid for Mr. Santilli to use negative index of refraction when they are thought since high school that they are positive. Zzz55zz

A positive index of refraction would prohibit he representation of matter-antimatter annihilation and have other technical inconsistencies. In any case, a positive index of refraction referred to antimatter would violate causality because it it must be referred to negative units. Also, you are requested to address Prof. Santilli as "Sir" since he has been knighted by the Republic of San Marino with the membership in the millenary Equestrian order of Sant'Agata precisely for his studies on antimatter (see the Documentation of Prof. santilli's Awards)

Zzz55zz, it appears that Prof. Santilli's historical discoveries have obliterated your mind since they set, by comparison, the failure of your life. JupiterSon

I do not accept Santilli's isodual theory of antimatter because, from negative values of the index if refraction, it implies antimatter light traveling faster than the speed of ordinary light. Dhe96vj

Dhe96vj, your argument is equivalent to the predominant view that antimatter galaxies do not exist because they are not predicted by Einstein;s theory. But antimatter was discovered decades following the formulation of special relativity. hence, using special relativity ti dismiss antimatter galaxies and, in your case, to dismiss the possibility that antimatter light may travel faster than c in a matter medium is purely political at best. The serious scientific statement is the humble ":we do not know.: JupiterSon

I believe that Prof. Santilli isodual theory of antimatter is one of the most fascinating theories ever conceived by the human mind, and I have recommended him for the Nobel Prize in Physics. Dwq02up

Thank you. JupiterSon

EDITORIAL NOTE: we solicit contributions in the field.

III.8. Detection of antimatter galaxies, asteroids and cosmic rays

Following the revival of the dismissal of the expansion of the universe by Einstein,Hubble, Hoyle, Zwicky, Fermi et al., following the identification of the need of antimatter galaxies for the stability of the universe, following the discovery of the isodual mathematics and physics for antimatter, and following the identification of the novel antimatter light and its new optics, Prof. Santilli finally initiated in 2011 the construction of an isodual astronomical telescope for the first detection in scientific history of antimatter galaxies, asteroids and cosmic rays.

More specifically, Santilli initiated in 2011 the construction of a pair of 100 mm telescopes, one of Galileo type and the other with lenses being the isodual image of the former, that is, 100 mm lenses with with diameter, curvatures and focal distance equal but opposite those of Galileo's lenses according to the rules of the isodual optics.

Symptomatically, numerous optical laboratories in the U.S.A and in Europe refused to construct the new telescope despite the availability of all necessary fund.proposals . Following a world wide search, Santilli then finally located in Mumbai, India, the optical laboratory Galileo Telescope Makers willing to build the new isodual telescope. A pair of identical 100 mm Galileo telescopes were purchased in the U.S.A. and shipped to the Indian laboratory. About one year later, the pair of Galileo and Santilli telescopes were delivered to the laboratory of the Institute for Basic Research (IBR), 150 Rainville Rd, in Tarpon Springs, Florida (which laboratory houses the Isoshift Testing Station).

The two telescopes were disassembled to verify that they were indeed isodual to each other. Santilli then initiated in late of 2012 the search of a location suitable for the detection of faint images of antimatter galaxies, by recalling from the preceding section that total darkness prevents any detection due to the expected black traces caused by the negative energy of antimatter light on the positive energy background of a digital camera.

In this way, Santilli selected the Gulf Anclote Park, Holiday, Florida, GPS coordinates Latitude 28,193, Longitude -82.786, because said park was sufficiently illuminated at night to create a visible, yet not excessive background. Next, Santilli purchase a Cannon Camera model D600 and, following consultations with camera experts, set the camera at 800 ISO and 15 seconds exposure so as to produce sufficiently long streaks caused by Earth's rotation.

The parallelism of the Galileo and Santilli telescope was verified, jointly with other technical data needed for the production of two different streaks with the same direction and length, one of light obtained via the Galileo telescope and one of darkness obtained via the Santilli telescope. Following a study of the night sky visible in the indicated park, Santilli selected the scan of the night sky of the Vega star because of its brightness and ensuing additional contribution to the background of the camera.

.

Finally, after some four decades of studies, Santilli initiated the scan of the Vega region of the nighty sky with the pair of 100 mm Galileo and Santilli telescopes at the indicated park on November 7, 2013, between the hours of 10 and 11 pm with the assistance of Mrs. Carla Santilli and the IBR engineer Alex Nas [67].

Analysis of the picture in the following day indicated such anomalous detections to justify systematic scans that were conducted in the subsequent nights. Representative pictures of Ref. [67] are reproduced below. The original pictures are available from the links of the references of the same paper jointly with numerous additional information.

Figure III.14. A view in the top of the first detection of an antimatter galaxy in scientific history achieved by Prof. R.M. Santilli [67] in the Vega region of the night sky via the use of a 100 mm isodual telescope in the Vega region of the night sky on November 7, 2013, between 10 and 11 pm at the Gulf Anclote Park, Holiday, Florida, GPS coordinates Latitude 28,193, Longitude -82.786. In accordance with P. A. M. Dirac [54], the streak is black because caused by a light carrying negative energy on the positive energy background of a Cannon camera model D600 set at ISO 800 and 15 seconds exposure. The bottom view is that of a matter galaxy obtained via a Galileo telescope with the same 100 mm diameter and focal distance (see Figure III.9 for the the used pair of 100 mm pair of telescopes and Ref. [67] for details as well as additional pictures).

Figure III.15. A vie of the first detection of an antimatter asteroid annihilating in our upper atmosphere obtained with the same isodual telescope, camera, setting,, time and location as those of Figure III.14. The streak is black, thus indicating its creation by a negative energy light, but the streak has a direction and length different than those of antimatter galaxies (Figure III.14), thus leaving as the sole known origin the annihilation of an antimatter asteroids in our upper atmosphere. The orientation and length of the streak under 15 second exposure indicates the high speed of the asteroids in accordance with study [55] (see Ref. [67] for all details and additional pictures).

Figure III.16. A view of the first detection at sea level of the isodual light emitted by the annihilation of antimatter cosmic rays (mostly antiprotons) in our upper atmosphere. It should be noted that none of the pictures obtained via the Santilli telescope and presented in these figuresI existed in the Galileo telescope and vice versa, thus confirming the historical character of the discovery.

The results of Ref.[67] were independently verified in Refs. [83, 84]. Representative detections of these verifications are reproduced in the figures below. The importance of these papers is not only that of verifying all results of Ref. [67], but also that of confirming the vision of P. A. M. Dirac [54] for conceiving antimatter as carrying negative energy, thus causing black streaks in the positive energy background of digital or film cameras.

Figure III.17. A view in the top of the first confirmation [83] of Santilli's detection of an antimatter galaxy in the Vega region of the night sky via a black streaks on the background of a digital camera. The confirmation was obtained via the same 100 mm pair of Galileo and Santilli telescopes equipped with the same camera and in the same location as those of Ref. [67]. The bottom view depicts a matter galaxy in the same region of the night sky. Note the parallelism of the two streaks under 15 seconds exposure.

Figure III.18. A view in the top of the first confirmation [83] of Santilli's detection [67] of an antimatter asteroids annihilating at high speed in our upper atmosphere, and a view in the bottom of the first confirmation of the detection at sea level of light originating from the annihilation in our upper atmosphere of antimatter cosmic rays all pictures obtained under the same conditions as those of Figure III.17 of images in the Santilli telescope that can be b(see Ref. [83] for details and additional pictures).

Figure III.19. A view in the top of the second confirmation [84] of Santilli's detection [[7] of an antimatter galaxy in the Vega region of the night sky obtained via the use of the same telescopes and in the same location as those of ref. [67] but via a film camera producing pictures with a better quality that that of a digital camera. The bottom picture depicts a matter galaxy or a star in the same Vega region of the night sky. Note again the parallelism of the two streaks under 15 second exposure.

Figure III.20. A view in the top of the second confirmation [84] of Santilli's detection [67] of an antimatter asteroid annihilating at high speeds in our upper atmosphere since the streak of darkness occurred under 15 second exposure in a direction different than those of the galaxies. A view at the bottom of numerous images that can be best interpreted as being due to the annihilation in our upper atmosphere of antimatter cosmic rays due to their localized character under 15 seconds exposure denoting their creation by a light that, being solely visible in the Santilli telescopes, is isodual light.

Following the above, rather considerable verifications of his isodual theory of antimatter, Santilli [69]decided to conduct the search for another antimatter galaxy to illustrate their expected existence throughout the universe. In view of matter-antimatter repulsion indicated earlier, antimatter galaxies are expected to be far away from our Milky Way. For this scope, Santilli selected the inspection of the night region of the Capella star (because sufficiently away from the main part of the Milky way). additionally, he selected the use of 150 mm pair of Galileo and Santilli telescopes of Figure III.9, and the use of a sensitive film camera rather than a digital camera for more detailed detections.

For the specific intent of illustrating the dramatic departures of the prerequisites for the detection of antimatter galaxies from those of matter galaxies, including the need of background illumination rather than complete darkness, Santilli selected a urban area of the city of Palm Harbor, Florida, GPS Coordinates: latitude 28.117201 (North), longitude -82.76894700000003. The detection was initiated on April 29, 2016, and repeated thereafter for a total of three consecutive nights. Representative pictures of the numerous scans collection in these detection are reproduced below (see Ref. [69] for a detailed presentation).

Figure III.21. A view in the top of the detection by Santilli [69] of a second antimatter galaxy, this time, in the Capella region of the night sky, via the use of the 150 mm pair of Galileo and Santilli telescopes 9see Figure III.9) equipped with a film camera set at 15 second automatic exposure. The discovery was done at 10 pm of April 29, 2016, from the urban areas of Palm Harbor, Florida, with GPS Coordinates: latitude 28.117201 (North), longitude -82.76894700000003, and continued in the following nights for a total of three independent detections. The bottom view depicts the Capella "star" which, as well known, is in reality a twin star system. Note the inversion of black and white due to the use of negatives. Note also that the length of the streaks is smaller than those of Figure III.14 due to the use of the more powerful 1500 mm, rather the 100 mm telescopes, with ensuing increased enlargement.

Figure III.22. A view in the top of one of one of the numerous streaks of darkness in a direction different than that of Earth';s rotation under 15 second exposure, thus confirming the origin as being due to the annihilation in the upper atmosphere of a small antimatter asteroid at very high speed. The bottom view depicts one of the numerous black dots detected by the Santilli telescope, but absent in the Galileo telescope, during these observations, which dark dots can only credibly explained, in view of the 15 seconds exposure, as being due to the detection at sea level of the annihilation in the upper atmosphere of antimatter cosmic rays (see Ref.[69] for all details).

In closing this introductory review, I should recall that the R. M. Santilli Foundation can make available at no cost to qualified scholars anywhere in the world pairs of Galileo and Santilli telescopes for the independent rerun of all detections. to apply, please qualification,location and proposed detection to email: board(at)santilli-foundation(dot)org. JupiterSon

JupiterSon, could you please indicate the some of the astrophysical studies Prof. Santilli is currently doing? I would be interested in some form of participation, in the event possible. Vfd63py

Yes, Vfd63py, I gladly second your kind and constructive request. Here are the main studies under way I can disclose:
Search for antimatter light emitted in the center of the Milky Way.
Prof. Santilli wants to disprove the universal belief that "no light can escape from a black hole." Such a statement is scientifically improper because based on the tacit beliefs that the only light existing in the universe is that we we see with our eyes. In fact, Prof. Santilli isodual theory of antimatter [51] predicts that antimatter light must be expelled by a black hole since it carried negative energy per Dirac's original conception [54]. Prof. Santilli's argument is that the extremely violent events in the interior of a black hole lead to the expected production of particle-antiparticle pairs that immediately annihilate into matter-light that remains trapped and antimatter light that must be expelled for numerous reasons. Consequently, Prof. Santilli has initiated the scan of the Milky Way - where a black hole is suspected to exist - with two pairs of Galileo and Santilli telescopes of different diameter illustrated below

\

The search is extremely difficult because the isodual light emitted by a matter black hole is predicted to be a minute fraction of the matter light usually emitted by the center of a galaxy, thus requiring extremely sensitive digital or film cameras. But Prof,. Santilli never even gave up any of his tests and he will do the same for these tests as well.
Search for a Solar antimatter light corona
Santilli isodual theory of antimatter also predicts that the Sun possesses two coronas, the well known, dominant, matter-light corona as well as the much weaker antimatter-light corona caused by the annihilation of particle-antiparticle pairs created in the violent events in the Sun, resulting in the production of matter-light attracted by the Sun gravitational field plus the antimatter-light which is repelled.

Prof. Santilli initiated the search of the Solar antimatter-light corona in conjunction with the recent Solar eclipse of August 21, 2017, see the outline Initiation of the search for the Solar Antimatter Corona PRWen Announcement and additional scans are planned. The technical difficulties are the same as those for the scan of the center of the Milky Way and deal with the need of extremely sensitive digital or film cameras.
This search is now under way in various countries. Besides Galileo-Santilli astrophysical stations available in the U.S.A., two additional same stations exist in Europe to begin testing this coming Spring, and an additional station is under organization in the Far East. Note that The R. M. Santilli Foundation has Galileo-Santilli astrophysical stations available to qualified scholars in temporary consignment at no cost. I hope that this information may offer you plenty of opportunities to participate. JupiterSon

How can I aparticipate?Vfd63py

Vfd63py, following - and only following - the acquisition of an in depth knowledge of Santilli isodual theory of antimatter and its detection of antimatter galaxies, asteroids and cosmic rays, you have to contact Prof,. Santilli at his email "research(at)i-b-r(dot)org" by indicating your qualifications and specific interest. You will find him very when approachable . Prof. Santilli collaborates with scientists all over the world irrespective of race, religion, or politics . JupiterSon

JupiterSon, please provide some guidelines on how to study the emission of Santilli isodual light by black holes. Thank you. Zds73of

Zds73of, thanks for your important inquiry. You should contact Prof. Santilli for that. Here are my suggestions that you should consider before contacting him. Firstly, positively, you must study the 15 sections on the plethora of inconsistencies and incompatibilities of Einstein general relativity with all other sciences from the important Forum Debating Einstein's general relativity You will see that you should completely abandon the use of general relativity for the problem of your interest, not only because of these inconsistencies and incompatibilities, but also because EGR was solely conceived for EXTERIOR GRAVITATIONAL PROBLEMS IN VACUUM. in my view, to conduct a study of matter black holes with a minimum of value, you need a GRAVITATIONAL THEORY SPECIFICALLY BUILT FOR INTERIOR GRAVITATIONAL PROBLEMS. The ONLY ONE available at this moment is SANTILLI ISOGRAVITATION [106]. In studying the latter theory you have to understand that ALL ISOTOPIC THEORIES, WHETER IN CLASSICAL MECHANICS, QUANTUM MECHANICS OR GRAVITATION, DO NOT HAVE SINGULARITIES BY CONCEPTION. This is technically realized via the isotopic element and it is due to the fact that singularities do not exist in nature. In this optics, "black holes" became "brown holes." In going deeper into these fascinating issues, you will see that Santilli isogravitation prevent one single brown hole to achieve an infinite mass as a necessary condition to prevent that one single brown hole engulfs the entire universe. You have to understand how the isoaxioms of isogravitation prevent that. Then, you have to understand the total compatibility of Santilli isogravitation with all other sciences -something impossible for Einstein's general relativity - as a necessary condition for any gravitational model to have a value that will resist the test of time. After you have acquired a technical knowledge of all the above, you have to duplicate it for antimatter brown holes and finally study their interplay. You will see then the absolute necessity for antimatter light to be expelled by a matter brown hole to prevent events so cataclysmic to destroy entire galaxies. I believe that the study of "the new era in cosmology" is the most exciting research topic around these days with no second on sight. Prof. Santilli is tutoring scientists from various countries on these new sciences and you should be free to contact him for questions Good luck.JupiterSon

EDITORIAL NOTE: we solicit contributions in the field.

# Under editing

III.9.The new era in cosmology

III.9.1. PREMISES
The understanding of Santilli's new cosmology [59], for the matter component of the universe requires the following admissions [1,18]:
A. 20th century sciences were developed for exterior dynamical problems consisting of point particles and electromagnetic waves propagating in vacuum;
B. There exist the broader interior dynamical problems consisting of extended particles and electromagnetic waves propagating within physical media [93-95];
C. It is not possible to achieve a consistent reduction of interior to exterior problems due to the no reduction theorem'
D. Interior dynamical problems are generally irreversible over time, as established by thermodynamical laws;
E. It is not possible to achieve a consistent treatment of irreversible interior problems with 20th century century sciences due to their strictly reversible character, thus requiring covering sciences.

Figure III.23. Since the dawn of civilization, humans believed that the only stars and galaxies existing in the universe are those visible to our eyes or to our Galileo-type telescopes. At the dawn of the third millennium, Prof. R. M. Santilli has proved that this is not true because the universe also contains antimatter stars and galaxies that "cannot" be seen by our eyes or by our Galileo-type telescopes because, as a necessary condition to verify the experimentally established annihilation of matter and antimatter, antimatter light must have an index of refraction opposite that of matter light, with consequential need of basically new optical instruments for their identification, Santilli telescopes with concave lenses.

Additionally, the understanding of the new cosmology requires a knowledge of the isodual theory for the quantitative treatment of the antimatter component of the universe in a way compatible with matter-antimatter annihilation, with corresponding isodual admissions A, B, C, D, E [51]. It then follows that the universe is an irreversible interior dynamical system, including the structure of hadrons, nuclei and stars, as well as the intergalactic medium for matter and antimatter.Exterior dynamical problems occur at the level of atomic structures, or at short distances from gravitational bodies that have no impact on cosmology due to its large scale structure.

Finally, the understanding of the new cosmology requires the knowledge of the following mathematics as well as their physical and chemical realizations [1,19-21] (see Refs. [99,100] for a review)
1. 20th century applied mathematics and its isodual, with particular reference to Lie's theory and its isodual, for the treatment of reversible exterior systems of point particles and antiparticles, respectively;
2. Isomathematics and its isodual, with particular reference to the Lie-Santilli isotheory and its isodual, for the treatment of reversal interior systems of extended particles and electromagnetic waves for matter and antimatter, respectively;
3. Genomathematics and its isodual, with particular reference to Santilli's Lie-admissible theory and its isodual, for the treatment of irreversible interior dynamical systems of matter and antimatter, respectively;

Santilli has stressed in his works that despite the achievement of consistent treatment of irreversibility [93-95], the above new mathematics remain insufficient for the description of the universe due to its complexity with expected needs for multi-valued (rather than multi-dimensional) formulations, as it is the case for biological structures.

This occurrence led Santilli to the adoption of the most general and complex mathematics conceived by the human mind, Vougiouklis Hypermathematics that includes isodual subclasses, with particular reference to Santilli Lie-admissible hyper theory for the treatment of the most general known, multi-valued irreversible interior systems [96098].

In the event of serious interest in studying Santilli's isoselfdual iso-, geno- and hyper-cosmologies, to avoid excessive complexities at start up, we recommend the study, firstly, of the isotopic formulations and pass to the broader genotopic and hyperstructural formulations only thereafter.

Along these initial lines, we recommend the study of: the new isomathematics and its isodual from memoir [20]; then the study of the fundamental new geometry of Santilli's cosmologies, the Minkowski-Santilli isogeometry for matter and its isodual for antimatter from memoir [29]; and finally the study of the isoselfdual isocosmology from memoirs [103-106].

The understanding of the new isocosmology requires the indicated admission that the universe is everywhere a physical medium, thus constituting an interior dynamic problem. This implies the inapplicability (and certainly not the "violation") of Einstein's special and general relativities because they were both constructed for the dynamical problem of their time, the exterior problem, in vacuum, thus being completely inapplicable for interior problems.

Finally, the understanding of the new isocosmology requires the knowledge that Santilli's covering isorelativity constitutes a unified formulation of interior and exterior problems, as well as of relativistic and gravitational problems because all of them are achieved via specific realizations of the isounit [1].

This grand unification of dynamical problems is possible thanks to the remarkable structure of the Minkowski-Santilli isogeometry in (3+1)-dimensional spacetime because its metric m, besides being regular, has an unrestricted functional dependence on all possible local variables, such as t, coordinates r, velocities v, density &mul, temperature τ, etc., m - m(t, r, v, μ, τ ...), thus including the Minkowskian, Riemannian, Fynslerian and all other possible metrics in (3.1)-dimensions.

Santilli's isometric is the decomposed into the isotopic element T* and the conventional Minkowski metric η,

m(t, r, v, μ, τ, ...) = T*(t, r, v, μ, τ, ...)η, T* > 0,    (20)

The formulation of the geometry with respect to an isofield with isounit I* given by the inverse of T*,

I*(t, r, v, μ, τ, ...) = 1/T*(t, r, v, μ, τ, ...) > 0,,    (21),

renders the geometry locally isomorphic to the conventional Minkowskian geometry, thus having no curvature, yet possessing a functional dependence inclusive as well as overpassing the Riemannian geometry [107,108]. The indicated grand unification is then a mere consequence.

As the serious scholar will see, a historically important advance is the resolution of the plethora of controversies on Einstein's gravitation due to its incompatibility with special relativity, quantum mechanics, grand unified theories of electroweak and gravitational interactions, etc. [106]. However, these resolutions are solely possible via the abandonment of curvature of space in favor of Santilli's covering isoflatness on isospaces over isofields [29].

In fact, within the context of Santilli isorelativity, the compatibility of special relativity and gravitation is trivially established by the limit m → η; the compatibility of gravitation with quantum mechanics is assured by relativistic hadronic mechanics because its abstract axioms are those of relativistic quantum mechanics [109], a consistent formulation of grand unified theories of electroweak and gravitational interactions for matter as well as for antimatter is possible for the first time [51], and the same goes for other controversies [106].

The following statement by Prof. Santilli is symptomatic: After studying cosmology for half a century, it is my view that no cosmology can be considered truly consistent without first achieving a consistent grand unification of electroweak and gravitational interactions inclusive of matter and antimatter, which grand unification implies, as a particular case, a consistent quantum theory of gravitation, the compatibility of relativistic band gravitational interactions, and the resolution of the remaining controversies that have raged for about one century.

In this process, rather than being abandoned, Einstein's conception are brought to their full potential of consistent applicability throughout the universe, provided that they are treated with the appropriate mathematics. For instance, Santilli stresses in his work that the prefix "iso" in the name "isoaxiom" is intended in its Greek meaning of preserving Einstein's axioms and only formulating then with new mathematics to such an extent that at the abstract realization-free level, Santilli isoaxioms and Einstein's axions coincide.

Needless to say, in the sections below we can merely present a rudimentary conceptual outline of Santilli's new cosmology. Their technical understanding can solely be obtained from the indicated main references since equations cannot be effectively represented in html format of this Forum, as well know.

III.9.2. SANTILLI ISOSELFDUAL COSMOLOGY
Under the limit assumptions: 1) The universe is composed by 50% of matter and 50% of antimatter to achieve perfect stability (Section III.1); 2) Both matter and antimatter components are approximated as consisting of exterior dynamical systems; and 3) The universe is perfectly static, thus invariant under time reversal, then Santilli Isoselfdual Cosmology characterizes a universe with the following basic features:
1. The total physical characteristics of the universe are identically null, that is, the universe has null total time null total energy, null total limber momentum, etc.;
nbsp;  2) The universe has no beginning and no end due to its time reversal invariance, as it is the case, for instance, for the hydrogen atom;
3. The universe verifies the symmetry of the conventional Dirac equation [51] given by the spinorial covering of the Poincare' symmetry multiplied by its isodual

{SL(2.C)×T(4)] × {SL(2.C)×T(4)]d    (22)

In this case, the matter component of the universe is treated via 20th century mathematics, physics and chemistry,

while its antimatter component is treated via the new isodual mathematics, isodual mechanics and isodual chemistry.

III.9.3. SANTILLI ISOSELFDUAL ISOCOSMOLOGY
A first covering of the above cosmology is characterized by maintaining the reversibility over time but replacing of exterior with interior dynamical systems treated via isomathematcs for matter and its isodual for antimatter, called Santilli IsoSelfDual IsoCosmology with universal isosymmetry

Suniv = (SL*(2.C)×T*(4)] × {SL*(2.C)×T*(4)]d    (23)

Note that, despite the use of the covering isomathematcs and its isodual, the universe remains without beginning and without end because imposed at the ultimate axiomatic levels by the tim reversibility of the formulations.

III.9.4. SANTILLI ISOSELFDUAL GENOCOSMOLOGY
The basic assumptions of the isoselfdual cosmology and isocosmology are excessively unrealistic for the large scale structure of the universe. The most restrictive assumption is that of the time reversal invariance because the universe is structurally irreversible over time as established by thermodynamics and large additional evidence.

Santilli IsoSelfDual GenoCosmology characterizes a universe composed by 50% matter and 50% antimatter, thus with null total physically characteristics, yet with an irreversible structure characterized by genomathematics for matter and its isodual for antimatter with universal invariance given by the forward isoselfdual genosymmetry

{\Suniv = (SL*(2.C)×T*(4)]> × {SL*(2.C)×T*(4)]>d    (24)

in irreversible conditions, thus admitting its creation, with equal amounts of matter and antimatter in irreversible conditions in interior conditions, thus requiring for quantitative treatment the novel genomathematics, genomechanics and genochemistry.

A main feature of the genocosmology is that the universe does indeed admit a beginning whose study can be greatly simplified by the lack of discontinuity, since the act of creation implies the creation of opposite worlds while maintaining the total null value of all characteristics before and after creation.

III.9.5. SANTILLI ISOSELFDUAL HYPERCOSMOLOGY
All preceding cosmologies are single-valued, in the sense that mathematical operations such as the multiplication produce one single result. As indicated in Section III.9.1, the universe is expected to be multi-valued in the sense that the multiplication can produce an ordered, unlimited number of results, while the multiplication itself as well as all operations are generalized into hyperoperations.

I which case, we have the most general conceivable cosmology given by Santilli's IsoSelfDual HyperCosmology based on Vougiouklis hyperstructures with a Santilli Lie-admissible hyper-theory and the single universal hyper-symmetry

Suniv = (SLh(2.C)×Th(4)\    (23)

The disappearance of the isodual component for the antimatter is due to the multi-valued character of the hyperstructures that, as such, can admit the formulations for both matter and antimatter. As an illustration, the simplest possible isoselfdual cosmology is a two-valued hyperstructure in which the first component is for matter and the second is for antimatter [98].

III.9.6. COSMOLOGICAL IMPLICATIONS
The best way to see the implications of Santilli isoselfdual isocosmology is to reproduce verbatim their presentation in Ref. [108];

1) The proposed cosmology is the only one known to this author which is characterized by a universal {\it symmetry} valid for relativistic and gravitational, exterior and interior, classical and operator, as well as matter and antimatter systems. In turn, the latter symmetry characterizes an (isoselfdual) {\it universal metric} ${\hat(\Eta}}_{Tot} = \hat{\eta} \times {\hat{\eta}}^d = {\hat{\Eta}}^d_{Tot}$ with unrestricted functional dependence on local spacetime, velocity, density, temperature, and any other needed variable.

2) The proposed cosmology is {\it isoselfdual} (i.e., invariant under isoduality), thus implying as limit conditions equal amounts of matter and antimatter in the universe. A novelty here is the treatment of antimatter with new mathematics possessing negative-definite units. As a result, {\it all} characteristics of antimatter (and not just the charge as in other cosmological models) are opposite to those of matter. Another novelty is that antimatter belongs to a spacetime physically different than that of matter yet coexistent with the same, hereon referred as {\it matter and antimatter "warps"} (we use here the term "warp" rather than "dimension" because the latter would be technically inappropriate in view of the identity of the dimension of the two spaces).

3) The proposed cosmology predicts the possibility for future experimental identification whether a far away galaxy or quasar is made up of matter of of antimatter. This possibility is permitted by the predictions that antimatter emits a light different than that of matter (the isodual light of Ref.$^{10c}$) which is {\it repelled} by the gravitational field of matter. Astrophysical studies along these lines are under way.

4) The proposed cosmology predicts {\it a universe with null total physical characteristics}, that is, null total mass, null total energy, null total time, etc., as measured by one observer made up of matter or, equivalently, of antimatter. This conception renders meaningless the question of the "age of the universe"; it removes the huge singularity of the big bang theory at creation (because total physical characteristics are null before and after creation); and it permits one of the firsts mathematically consistent representations of the creation of the universe.

5) The proposed cosmology admits a {\it novel notion of local spacetime}, the isospacetime described earlier, according to which different regions of the universe generally have different space and time characteristics due to {\it differences in the related units}, resulting in nine possible different isominkowskian Types. This renders meaningless the question of "the age of the matter (or, separately, antimatter) warp of the universe", the only physically meaningful questions being "the average age of the matter (and, independently, antimatter) warp of the universe" whose infinite value cannot be {\it a priori} excluded.

6) The proposed cosmology predicts speeds c = $c_o/n_4$ of electromagnetic waves which depend on the local physical conditions, which are {\it smaller} than the speed in vacuum $c_o$ for propagation within physical media of low density such as planetary atmospheres or astrophysical chromospheres (isominkowskian media of Types 2, 6, 5, 8, and which are {\it bigger} than $c_o$ for propagation within hyperdense media such as the interior of hadrons or in the core of stars (isominkowskian media of Types 3, 5, 9)$^{11l}$, thus admitting by conception and construction the superluminal speeds of Refs.$^{16}$.

7) The proposed cosmology can provide a direct geometrization (i.e., a representation via the universal metric itself) of any anisotropic and/or inhomogeneous distribution of light in the universe as established by experimental observations via isominkowskian media of Type 4 or 8.

8) The proposed cosmology predicts a size of the detected universe which is significantly {\it smaller} than that of current views$^{11f,11g}$. This is due to the {\it isodoppler redshift} according to which light exits a galaxy already redshifted. The argument is that the medium in the interior of galaxies is not "perfectly empty" but it is in reality an ordinary physical medium of low density isominkowskian media of Type 5) because of the presence of dust, particles, etc. The speed of light within such a medium is then {\it decreased} resulting in the first contribution to redshift $\hat{\omega} = {\omega}_o[1 - v/(c_o/n_4) + ...]$ with full isotopic contribution due to a (necessary) space-time symmetrization $\hat{\omega} = \-{\omega}_o[1 - (v/c_o)\times (n_4/n_s) + ...]$. Since $n_s . n_4$ for media of low density, the isotopy then increases the redshift originating in the interior of the galaxy. As a result, the inclusion of the physical medium inside a galaxy decreases the distance of the same from us on a comparative basis with current estimates. An additional reduction of the size of the universe is possible due the fact that the intergalactic space itself is a physical medium which, even though of extremely low density, it is nevertheless expected to yield a measurable contribution because of the extremely large intergalactic distances, thus yielding an additional isoredshift. Since no astrophysical information is currently available on the above media, the isominkowskian geometry can provide either a small correction to the current estimates of expansion of the universe or, as a limit case, its elimination altogether. The reader should also be aware that the isominkowskian geometry predicts for each cosmological isoredshift the existence of an internal isored- or isoblue-shift because the effects here considered depends on the frequency$^{11g}$, that is, the n's depend on ${\omega}_o$.

9) The proposed cosmology eliminates the need for the "missing mass". In fact, the latter emerges because the total energy of the universe is computed under the {\it tacit assumption} of the universality of the speed of light in vacuum with the familiar expression $E_{Tot} = M_{Tot}c_o^2$, while the expression predicted by the proposed cosmology is $\hat E_{Tot} = M_{Tot}\times c^2$. JupiterSon

JupiterSon, I find Santilli's iso-, geno- and hyper-cosmologies fascinating, particularly for the final synthsis of a universe with null total physical characteristics at all levels. Please outline, Prof, Santilli's view on the origin of irreversibility in the universe, the mechanism for continuous creation, and the local character of time. Thanks. Vds35oy

Vds35oy, Thank you for your inquiry and for your polite language. I will try my best by copying here and there from Prof. Santilli's papers.
Irreversibility
In Prof. Santilli view, see the two 1978 monographs written at Harvard and published by Springer Verlag [18], the origin of the irreversibility of nature was first identified by Lagrange and Hamilton and represented with the external terms in heir analytic equations. These analytic equations are dramatically outside any possible quantitative treatment with 20th century sciences because they do not admit a representation via a variational principle. Prof. Santilli 's contributions inn irreversibility are several, and include: 1) The first known representation of the true analytic equations with a variational principle via the Birkhoffian generalization of conventional Hamiltonian mechanism (that without external terms); 2) The discovery of genomathematics with a Lie-admissible structure for their The construction of hadronic mechanics (their genotopic branch) for quantitative physical treatments of irreversible processes, such as any energy releasing process; 3) The representation of the true analytic equations with Santilli forward Lie-admissible analytic and operator equations [93-95; 5) The proof that the reversibility of all 209th century sciences (classical and quantum mechanics,m Einstein relativities, etc.) is due to their abstraction if particles as massive point, as mandated by the local character of the differential calculus "dr" which is solely defined at the point "r", and the emergence of irreversibility whenever particles are represented with their actual size since solely the latter admit Lagrange's and Hamilton's external forces. In my view, Prof. Santilli most fundamental contribution in irreversibility has been his geno-differential calculus [20] D8r* = T*d[r1*] where the forward genotopic element representing extended dimensions and the external forces is are different than the backward ones, thus assuring irreversibility from ultimate primitive axioms from which veruthing else follows uniquely and unambiguously,
Origin of continuous creation
Prof. santilli;'s mechanism of continuous creation is the synthesis of neutrons from the Hydrogen in the core of stars which requires 0.782 MeV per neutrons [27,28]. Recall that a star initiates its life as an aggregate of Hydrogen. "Before" producing light, a star has to synthesize neutrons to create Deuterium, Tritium, etc. whose fusion release energy. But stars create 1050 or so neutronsper second Hence, in the event the energy missing for the neutron synthesis is provided by the Hydrogen aggregate itself, that aggregate would lose 1050 MeV or so per second, thus being unable to produce light. the only logical explanation, which I accept is that the missing energy originates from space conceived as a universal substratum underlying the entire universe with an enormous energy density. Energy is propagated from the ether to the neutron via Santilli etherino [1-1] which is not a particle but a longitudinal impulse propagating at a multiple the speed of light (currently under study for basically new communications as needed for interstellar travel). Additional need for the continuous creation are given by the incredible energy released by supernova explosion which has been "adjusted" to comply with Einstein's special relativity and quantum mechanics in a way that will not resist the test of time.
Local isotime
Remember that isomathematics can be obtained via a nonunitary map of conventional applied mathematics. This requires that conventional number should be written as isonumber with a trivial unit, that is, n* = n1, because only them we have compatibility with the real isonumbers n* = n1*, namely, those with an arbitrary positive isounit 1*. But then you can see that our time t* = t1 is a particular case of Santilli isotime t* = t'1* where the new value of time t emerges from then property of all isotopies of conserved original values, that is, t1 must be equal to t'1*. This leads to Santilli isotime t' in a rather powerful way, because from the ultimate foundation of mathematics. But Prof. Santilli is a believer in the validity of 20th century sciences in vacuum. hence, he accepts the conventional time t everywhere in the empty part of the universe. But that's a minute fraction of the universe, Everywhere else you have the validity of Santilli isotime t* = t1* and this include all interior dynamical problems, including the universe as a whole since intergalactic space is not empty. To understand the compatibility with other sciences, you should know that Santilli isotime is necessary for the a quantitative representation of the the missing 0.782 MeV needed for the synthesis of the neutron [27,28]. P;ease feel free to ask additional questions but, preferably, after have studied at least some of Prof. Santilli's paper. regards.

I feel it should be noted publicly that, for many years, outstanding scientists have been conspicuous by the absence of their names from the lists of Nobel Laureates. Amongst these we may count the Norwegian Kristian Birkeland, some of whose findings were almost ridiculed in his lifetime but have been totally vindicated more recently, the naturalised American Nikola Tesla, many of whose later writings were confiscated at his death and only now are slowly coming to light, leading many to wonder just how much he did achieve in his lifetime, and the Englishman Fred Hoyle, who appears to have suffered partially due to being a little too blunt in his speaking on occasions. Surely the name of Ruggero Santilli must be added to this sad list, but not for any of the reasons suggested for the above three people; rather, possibly, for an enviable tendency to venture where (in Star Trek parlance) no-one has gone before. He is one who has truly looked afresh at the science and mathematics behind many issues facing mankind and for this he should be commended, not condemned! Zwe67io

THE PARALLEL LIVES OF GALILEO GALILEO AND RUGGERO SANTILLI

1. Both Galileo and Santilli were born and educated in Italy.

2. Galileo set the foundations of the first relativity, that for point masses in vacuum, while Santilli set the foundations for the covering of Galileo relativity for extended masses moving within physical media.

3. Galileo was the first to develop his telescope with convex lenses for the observation of astrophysical bodies made up of matter, while Santilli was the first to develop his telescope with concave lenses for the observation of bodies made up of antimatter.

4. Galileo dispelled the belief that Earth is at the center of the universe while, four centuries later, Santilli dispelled again the belief implied by the conjecture of the expansion of the universe that Earth is at the center of the universe due to the radial character from Earth of the cosmological redshift of galactic light.

5. Galileo received life threats from the scientific power of his time, the Catholic Church, and Santilli also received life threats from the scientific power of his time, the "organized academic, financial and ethnic interests on Einstein" (see Santilli's 1984 "Il Grande Grido"). Car59pq

III.10..Concluding remarks

The shadow on the image of the scientific community in history has been caused by a century of never ending chain of cosmological conjectures, each one proffered in an attempt to salvage a preceding failed conjecture. Said shadow was ultimately due to an incredible insistence over one full century that all cosmological conjectures had to verify Einstein's special relativity. Consequently, no serious advance in cosmology is possible without a critical examination of the validity of special relativity for the large scale structure of the universe.

In the opening statements of this blog, we have reviewed the mathematical, theoretical and experimental advances achieved by Prof. R. M. Santilli in four decades of studies: the revival of the rejection of the expansion of the universe by Einstein, Hubble, Hoyle, Zwicky, Fermi and other famous scientists (Part I); the conceptual, geometrical and experimental evidence establishing the validity of said historical view (Part II); and the construction of a new cosmology based on the novel Santilli isomathematics and related covering isorelativity specifically constructed and verified for dynamics within physical media (Part III).

In particular, Santilli has shown that special relativity is inapplicable for the large scale structure of the universe in a two-fold way, firstly, for the matter component of the universe, and secondly, for the antimatter counter-part, since the latter requires anti-homomorphic image of isomathematics known as Santilli isodual isomathematcs and related isodual isorelativity which are necessary for a formulation of antimatter consistent with matter-antimatter annihilation [51].

Additional reasons for the never ending controversies in cosmology has been the use of Einstein's general relativity in cosmology because its use at inter-galactic distances is manifestly questionable due to the lack of any appreciable gravitational field, and its use for the rest of the universe is equally questionable due to the known inability by general relativity to treat interior gravitational problems. The above controversies have been multiplied by the vast, yet ignored experimental evidence on the lack of actual curvature of space because of the historical evidence, dating back to Newton's time, that the 'bending of light' is due to the refraction of light passing through astrophysical chromosphere, plus Newton's gravitation, without any curvature of space at all as treated in the adjoining Debating General Relativity.

To resolve these ambiguities, Santilli has constructed a reformulation of general relativity on the flat iso-Minkowskian space, known as isogravitation, for matter and its complementary isodual isogravitation for antimatter, that assures joint quantitative treatments of both exterior and interior gravitational problems for matter and antimatter, respectively. Remarkably, isogravitation for matter and its isodual for antimatter are based on the same axioms of isorelativity and its isodual, respectively, thus achieving a unified axiomatic structure of the universe.

Once the above novel mathematics and relativities are understood, Santilli isocosmology emerges uniquely and unambiguously from the characterization of the universe by the new cosmological symmetry, the Lorentz-Poincare'-Santilli isosymmetry for matter and its isodual for antimatter.

In contrast to the century-old widespread tendency to maintain Einstein's special relativities even when proved to be inapplicable, Santilli ends his cosmological studies by recalling the science at large, and cosmology in particular, will never admit terminal theories, since his cosmology is applicable under the assumption in first approximation that the universe is time-reversal invariant, thus implying the broader genocosmology based on the covering genomathematics and genorelativity. for the representation of the irreversibility of the universe, and the most general conceivable hypercosmology based on the multi-valued (rather than multi-dimensional) hypermathematics and hyperrelativity for the representation of the universe inclusive of its biological content [1], JupiterSon

REFERENCES

[1] R. M. Santilli. "An introduction to the new sciences for a new era," Invited paper, SIPS 2016, Hainan Island, China, Clifford Analysis, Clifford Algebras and their Applications Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 1-119, 2017
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/new-sciences-new-era.pdf

[2] P. Fleming, "Collected papers, interviews, seminars and international press releases on the lack of expansion of the universe"
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/No-universe-expans.pdf

[3] E. Hubble, in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Vol. 15, 168 (1929), s.

[4] A.Einstein, Ann. Phys., Vol. 17, 891 (1905).

[5] Encyclopedia Britannica, the Manhattan project
https://www.britannica.com/event/Manhattan-Project

[6] Wikipedia, Hubble's Law
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble%27s_law

[7] Wikipedia, Metric Expansion of space
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_expansion_of_space

[8] Wikipedia, Acceleration of the expansion of the universe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerating_expansion_of_the_universe

[9] Wikipedia, Big Bang
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

[11] Wikipedia, Cosmological Inflation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_(cosmology)

[12] Wikipedia, Dark Matter
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter

[13] Wikipedia, Dark Energy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy

[14] Wikipedia, Special Relativity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_relativity

[15] Wikipedia, General Relativity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity

[16] Wikipedia, Ruggero Maria Santilli
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruggero_Santilli

[17] Wikipedia, Tired Light
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tired_light

[18] R. M. Santilli, Foundation of Theoretical Mechanics, Volume I (1978), and Volume II (1982), Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-209.pdf
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/santilli-69.pdf

[19] R. M. Santilli, "Isonumbers and Genonumbers of Dimensions 1, 2, 4, 8, their Isoduals and Pseudoduals, and "Hidden Numbers" of Dimension 3, 5, 6, 7," Algebras, Groups and Geometries Vol. 10, 273 (1993)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-34.pdf

[20] R. M. Santilli, "Nonlocal-Integral Isotopies of Differential Calculus, Mechanics and Geometries," in Isotopies of Contemporary Mathematical Structures, P. Vetro Editor, Rendiconti Circolo Matematico Palermo, Suppl. Vol. 42, 7-82 (1996)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-37.pdf

[21] R. M. Santilli, Elements of Hadronic Mechanics, Volumes I and II (1995), Ukraine Academy of Sciences, Kiev, Ukraine,
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-300.pdf
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-301.pdf

[22] R. M. Santilli, "Lie-isotopic Lifting of Special Relativity for Extended Deformable Particles," Lettere Nuovo Cimento {\bf 37}, 545 (1983)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-50.pdf

[23] R. M. Santilli, "Lie-isotopic Lifting of Unitary Symmetries and of Wigner's Theorem for Extended and Deformable Particles," Lettere Nuovo Cimento Vol. 38, 509 (1983)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-51.pdf

[24] R. M. Santilli, ''Isotopies of Lie Symmetries," I (basic theory) and II (isotopies of the rotational symmetry), Hadronic J. Vol. 8, 36 (1985)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/santilli-65.pdf

[25] R. M. Santilli, "Isotopic Lifting of the SU(2) Symmetry with Applications to Nuclear Physics," JINR rapid Comm. Vol. 6. 24-38 (1993)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-19.pdf

[26] R. M. Santilli, "Nonlinear, Nonlocal and Noncanonical Isotopies of the Poincare' Symmetry," Journal of the Moscow Phys. Soc. Vol. 3, 255 (1993)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-40.pdf

[27] R. M. Santilli, "Recent theoretical and experimental evidence on the synthesis of the neutron," Communication of the JINR, Dubna, Russia, No. E4-93-252 (1993)

[28] R. M. Santilli, "Isorepresentation of the Lie-isotopic SU(2) Algebra with Application to Nuclear Physics and Local Realism," Acta Applicandae Mathematicae Vol. 50, 177 (1998)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-27.pdf

[29] R. M. Santilli, "Isominkowskian Geometry for the Gravitational Treatment of Matter and its Isodual for Antimatter," Intern. J. Modern Phys. D, Vol. 7, 351 (1998),
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-35.pdf

[30] A. K. Aringazin and K. M. Aringazin, "Universality of Santilli's iso-Minkowskian geometry" in Frontiers of Fundamental Physics, M. Barone and F. Selleri, Editors Plenum (1995), available as free download from
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-29.pdf

[31] J. V. Kadeisvili, "Direct universality of the Lorentz-Poincare'-Santilli isosymmetry for extended-deformable particles, arbitrary speeds of light and all possible spacetimes" in Photons: Old problems in Light of New Ideas, V. V. Dvoeglazov Editor Nova Science (2000, available as free download from
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-25.pdf

[32] R. M. Santilli, "Direct universality of isospecial relativity for photons with arbitrary speeds" in Photons: Old problems in Light of New Ideas, V. V. Dvoeglazov Editor Nova Science (2000)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-24.pdf

[33] R. M. Santilli, Isotopic Generalizations of Galilei and Einstein Relativities, Vols. I and II (1991), Ukraine Academy of Sciences
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-01.pdf
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-61.pdf

[35] R. M. Santilli, "Experimental Verifications of IsoRedShift with Possible Absence of Universe Expansion, Big Bang, Dark Matter, and Dark Energy," The Open Astronomy Journal, Vol. 3, 124 (2010)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-isoredshift.pdf

[36] R. M. Santilli, "Experimental Verification of IsoRedShift and its Cosmological Implications," contributed paper to the Proceedings of the International Conference on Numerical Analysis and Applied Mathematics, Rhodes, Greece, September 19-25, 2010, T. E. Simos, Editor, American Institute of Physics Conference Proceedings Vol. 1281, pp. 882-885 (2010)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Isoredshift-Letter.pdf

[37] R. M. Santilli, G. West and G. Amato, "Experimental Confirmation of the IsoRedShift at Sun, at Sunset and Sunrise with Consequential Absence of Universe Expansion and Related Conjectures, " Journal of Computational Methods in Sciences and Engineering, Vol. 12, pages 165-188 (2012)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Confirmation-sun-IRS.pdf

[38] G. West and G. Amato, "Experimental Confirmation of Santilli's IsoRedShift and IsoBlueShift," contributed paper to the Proceedings of the San Marino Workshop on Astrophysics and Cosmology for Matter and Antimatter, Republic of San Marino, September 5 to 9, 2011, in press (2012)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Confirmation-IRS-IBS.pdf

[39] H. Ahmar, G. Amato, J. V. Kadeisvili, J. Manuel, G. West, and O. Zogorodnia, "Additional experimental confirmations of Santilli's IsoRedShift and the consequential lack of expansion of the universe,"Journal of Computational Methods in Sciences and Engineering, Vol. 13, page 321 (2013)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/IRS-confirmations-212.pdf

[40] R. M. Santilli, "Representation of galactic dynamics via isoshifts without universe expansion, dark matter and dark energy," American Journal of Modern Physics Vol. 4, pages 26-43, 2015
http://www.thunder-energies.com/docs/dark-matter-2015.pdf

[41] S J. Dhoble, "Cosmological implications of Santilli IRS and IBR," to appear (2014) http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/irs-ibs-2014.pdf

[42] R. Anderson, et al, Editors, San Marino Workshop on Astrophysics and Cosmology for Matter and Antimatter, September 5 to 9, 2011
http://www.world-lecture-series.org/san-marino-2011
and lectures from subsequent meetings in the links
http://www.world-lecture-series.org/level-v
http://www.world-lecture-series.org/san-marino-2011
http://www.world-lecture-series.org/kos-2012
http://www.world-lecture-series.org/invited-2014-keynote-lectures

[43] R. M. Santilli, Hadronic Mathematics, Mechanics and Chemistry, Vol. I, II, III, IV and V (2006), International Academic Press

[44] I. Gandzha and J. Kadeisvili, New Sciences for a New Era: Mathematical, Physical and Chemical Discoveries of Ruggero Maria Santilli, Sankata Printing Press, Nepal (2011)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/RMS.pdf

[45] Wik Criticism of Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Wikipedia

[46] H. Arp. {\it Quasars Redshift and Controversies.} Interstellar Media, Berkeley (1987).

[47] J. Dunning-Davies. Exploding a Myth,, Harwood Publishing Limited, 2007

[48] Wikipedia, Halton Arp,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halton_Arp

[49] F. Zwicky, "On the Red Shift of Spectral Lines through Interstellar Space," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Vol. 15, 773 (1929)
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprintframed/15/10/773

[50] wikipedia, Tired Light
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tired_light

[51] R.M. Santilli, Isodual Theory of Antimatter with Applications to Antigravity, Grand Unification and Cosmology, Springer (2006)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/santilli-79.pdf

[52] S. Beghella-Bartoli, R. M. Santilli, "Possible Role of Antimatter Galaxies for the Stability of the Universe," American Journal of Modern Physics 2016; 5(2-1): 185-190
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/pdf11.pdf

[53] R. Anderson. "Scientific description of Santilli's comparative test of the gravity of electrons and positrons in a horizontal supercooled and supervacuum tube"
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-gravity-experiment.pdf

[54] P. A. M. Dirac, Proceedings of the Royal Society 1928, Vol. 117, 610-624

[55] S. Beghella Bartoli, "Trajectories of antimatter bodies in our solar system according to the isodual theory of antimatter," Hadronic Journal Vol. 37, pages 1-27, 2014
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Simone-FINAL.pdf.

[56] Phenomena, Tunguska Daily
http://www.phenomena.org.uk/features/page88/page88.html

[57] Chicago Tribute, The 1871 Chicago Fire
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-080726-chicago-fire-photogallery-photogallery.html

[58] Skate, What exploded over Russia this time?

[59] R. M. Santilli, "A new cosmological conception of the universe based on the Isominkowskian geometry and its isodual, Part I pages 539-612 and Part II pages Contributed paper in Analysis, Geometry and Groups, A Riemann Legacy Volume, Volume II, H.M. Srivastava, Editor, pp. 539-612 (1993)

[60] R. M. Santilli, Antigravity," Hadronic J. 1994, Vol. 17, 257-284
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-113.pdf

[61] R. M. Santilli, "Representation of antiparticles via isodual numbers, spaces and geometries, " Comm. Theor. Phys. 1994, Vol. 3, 153-181
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-112.pdf

[62] R. M. Santilli, "A Classical Isodual Theory Of Antimatter And Its Prediction Of Antigravity", International Journal of Modern Physics A, 14 (1999) 2205-2238
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-09.pdf

[63] R. M. Santilli, "Does antimatter emit a new light?" Invited paper for the proceedings of the International Conference on Antimatter, held in Sepino, Italy, on May 1996, published in Hyperfine Interactions 1997, Vol. 109, 63-81
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-28.pdf

[64] R. M. Santilli, "Isotopic relativity for matter and its isodual for antimatter," Gravitation 1997, Vol. 3, 2.

[65] R. M. Santilli, Can antimatter asteroids, stars and galaxies be detected with current means?" in Proceedings of the Third International Conference on the Lie-Admissible Treatment of Irreversible Processes, C. Corda, Editor, Kathmandu University (2011) pages 25-36
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Antimatter-Asteroid.pdf

[66] R. M. Santilli, "The Mystery of Detecting Antimatter Asteroids, Stars and Galaxies," American Institute of Physics, Proceed. 2012, Vol. 1479, 1028-1032 (2012)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/antimatter-asteroids.pdf

[67] R. M. Santilli, "Apparent detection of antimatter galaxies via a telescope with convex lenses," Clifford Analysis, Clifford Algebras and their Applications vol. 3, 2014, pages 1-26 (Cambridge, U.K)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Antimatter-telescope-2013-final.pdf.

[68] R. M. Santilli, "Representative pictures from the Antimatter telescope"
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Antimatter-Vega-system-2013.

[69] R. M. Santilli, "Apparent Detection of a New Antimatter Galaxy in the Capella Region of the Night Sky," Clifford Analysis, Clifford Algebras and their Applications, in press (2016)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/capella-antimatter-galaxy.pdf

[70] R. M. Santilli, "Detection of Terrestrial Entities via the Isodual telescope," American Journal of Modern Physics Vol. 5, issue 3, pages 45-53, 2016
http://www.thunder-energies.com/docs/ITE-paper-12-15-15.pdf

[71] J. Dunning-Davies, "Thermodynamics of antimatter via Santilli's isodualities." Found. Phys./ Vol. 12, page 593 (1999)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Isodual-therm.pdf

[72] J. Dunning-Davies, "Thermodynamics of Antimatter via Santilli's isodualities", Foundations of Physics Letters, 12, (1999) pp. 593-599

[73] P. Mills, A., "Possibilities of measuring the gravitational mass of electrons and positrons in free horizontal flight," contributed paper for the proceedings of the International Conference on Antimatter, held in Sepino, Italy, May 1996, published in the Hadronic J. 1996, Vol. 19, 77-96
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-11.pdf

[74] B. Davvaz, R. M. Santilli and T. Vougiouklis, "Studies of Multi-Valued Hyperstructures for the Characterization of Matter-Antimatter Systems and their Extension", in Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Lie-admissible Formulations for Irreversible Processes, C. Corda, editor, Kathmandu University, Nepal, 2011, pages 45-57
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/Hyperstructures.pdf

[75] V.de Haan, "Proposal for the realization of Santilli comparative test on the gravity of electrons and positrons via a horizontal supercooled vacuum tube", Proceedings of the Third International Conference on the Lie-Admissible Treatment of Irreversible Processes, C. Corda, Editor, Kathmandu University, (2011), pp. 57-67
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-gravity-experiment.pdf.

[76] R. Anderson, A. A. Bhalekar, B. Davvaz, P. Muktibodh, R. M. Tangde, and T. Vougiouklis, "An introduction to Santilli isodual theory of antimatter and the ensuing problem of detecting antimatter asteroids," Numta Bulletin 2012-2013, Vol. 6, 1-33
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Antimatter-2013.pdf

[77] P. S. Muktibodh, "Introduction to Isodual Mathematics and its Application to Special Relativity," American Institute of Physics Proceedings 2013
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/P-Muktibodh.pdf

[78] Vougiouklis, "An Introduction to Santilli's Isodual Representation of Antimatter and the Ensuing Problem of Detecting Antimatter Asteroids," Numta Bulletin Issue 6-7, (2013). pp. 1-33
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Antimatter-2013.pdf

[79] P. M. Bhujbal, "Santilli's Detection of Antimatter Galaxies: An Introduction and Experimental Confirmation", AIP Conference Proceedings Vol. 1648 (2015) pp. 510005-1-510005-5 http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4912710
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/1.4912710(PM Bhujbal).pdf

[80] P. M. Bhujbal, "Santilli's Apparent Detection of Antimatter Galaxies: An Introduction and Experimental Confirmation", Hadronic Journal [Submitted for Publication] ISSN: 0162-5519
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/bhujpal- antim-2014.pdf

[81] A. A. Bhalekar,"Studies of Santilli's isotopic, genotopic and isodual four directions of time," American Institute of Physics proceedings, 2013
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/news.html.

[82] R. Anderson, A. A. Bhalekar, B. Davvaz, P. Muktibodh, V. M. Tangde, and T. Vougiouklis, "An introduction to Santilli's isodual theory of antimatter and the ensuing problem of detecting antimatter asteroids," Numta Bulletin Issue 67, pages 1-33, 2013
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Antimatter-2013.pdf

[83] P. Bhujbal, J. V. Kadeisvili, A. Nas, S Randall, and T. R. Shelke. "Preliminary confirmation of antimatter detection via Santilli telescope with concave lenses," Clifford Analysis, Clifford Algebras and their Applications Vol. 3, pages 27-39, 2014 (Cambridge, UK)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Con-Ant-Tel-2013.pdf

[84] S. Beghella-Bartoli, P. M. Bhujbal, A. Nas, "Confirmation of Santilli's Detection of Antimatter Galaxies via a Telescope with Concave Lenses," American Journal of Modern Physics, Vol. 4, pp 34-41 (2015)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/antimatter-detect-2014.pdf

[85] P. M. Bhujbal,"Santilli's isodual mathematics and and physics for antimatter," American Journal of Modern Physics Vol.5, No.20-1, pp 1610194 (2016)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/bhujbal-2016.docx

[86] R. M. Santilli Il Grande Grido - - Ethical Problem of Einstein followers in the U.S.A: An Insider's View, (1984) and Documentation of Il Grande Grido, Vols. I, II and III (1985) Alpha Publishing
http://www.scientificethics.org/IlGrandeGrido.htm
1985-2008 update
http://www.scientificethics.org/Santilli-ethical-decay.htm

[87] John Ross, Editor, The Harvard Crimson, "The Politics of Science,"
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/HarvardCrimson.pdf

[88] Jeremy Dunning Davies, Exploding a myth: "Conventional Wisdom" or Scientific Truth, Horwood Publishing Limited, 2007

[89] Karl Popper, Quantum Theory and the Shism in Physics, Cambridge University Press (1982)

[90] R. M. Santilli, The hypothesis of the pseudoproton," Clifford Analysis, Clifford Algebras and their Applications Vol. 3, pages 1-26, 2014 (Cambridge, UK)>
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Antimatter-telescope-2013-final.pdf

[91] R. M. Santilli, "Apparent nuclear transmutations without neutron emission triggered by pseudoprotons," American Journal of Modern Physics Vol. 4, p. 15-18 (2015)
http://www.thunder-energies.com/docs/pseudoproton-2014.pdf

[92] V.-Otto de Haan, Possibilities for the detection of Santilli's neutroids and pseudo-protons,"American Journal of Modern Physics, in press (2015)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Pseudo-proton-deHaan.pdf

[93] R. M. Santilli, Embedding of Lie-algebras into Lie-admissible algebras," Nuovo Cimento {\bf 51}, 570 (1967),
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-54.pdf

{94] R. M. Santilli, "On a possible Lie-admissible covering of Galilei's relativity in Newtonian mechanics for nonconservative and Galilei form-non-invariant systems," Hadronic J. Vol. 1, 223-423 (1978), available in free pdf download from
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-58.pdf

[95] R. M. Santilli, "Lie-admissible invariant representation of irreversibility for matter and antimatter at the classical and operator levels," Nuovo Cimento B 121, 443 (2006),

[96] Thomas Vougiouklis, Hypermathematics, Hv-Structures, Hypernumbers, Hypermatrices and Lie-Santilli Addmissibility, American Journal of Modern Physics, Vol. 4, No. 5, 2015, pp. 38-46.11 Special Issue I; Foundations of Hadronic Mathematics Dedicated to the 80th Birthday of Prof. R. M. Santilli
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/10.11648.j.ajmp.s.2015040501.15.pdf

[97] Davvaz B, Santilli RM and Vougiouklis T Algebra, Hyperalgebra and Lie-Santilli Theory Journal of Generalized Lie Theory and Applications Vol. 9, 230-235 (2015)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Lie-Santilli-2015.pdf

[98] B. Davvaz, R. M. Santilli and T. Vougiouklis, Studies Of Multi-Valued Hyperstructures For The characterization Of Matter-Antimatter Systems And Their Extension Proceedings of the Third International Conference on the Lie-Admissible Treatment of Irreversible Processes, C. Corda, Editor, Kathmandu University (2011), pages 45-57
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Davvaz-Sant-Vou.pdf

[99] R. Anderson "Outline of Hadronic Mathematics, Mechanics and Chemistry as Conceived by R. M. Santilli," Special Issue III: Foundations of Hadronic Chemistry, American Journal of Modern Physics 2017; 6(4-1): 1-16
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/HMMC-2017.pdf

[100] I. Gandzha and S V. Cadeisvili, New Sciences for a New Era: Mathematical, Physical and Chemical Discoveries of Ruggero Maria Santilli, Sankata Printing Press, Nepal (2011)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/RMS.pdf

[101] R. M. Santilli, "The etherino and/or the Neutrino Hypothesis?" Found. Phys. {\bf 37}, p. 670 (2007)
www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/EtherinoFoundPhys.pdf

]102] Richard Norman, Anil A. Bhalekar, Simone Beghella Bartoli, Brian Buckley, Jeremy Dunning-Davies, Jan Rak, and Ruggero M. Santilli. "Experimental Confirmation of the Synthesis of Neutrons and Neutroids from a Hydrogen Gas." American Journal of Modern Physics, in pres (2017)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/122015010-final-07-04-17.pdf

[103] R. Norman and J. Dunning-Davies, "Hadronic paradigm assessed: neutroid and neutron synthesis from an arc of current in hydrogen gas," Hadronic Journal V. 40, 119 - 140 (2017)
http://santilli-foundation.org/docs/norman-dunning-davies-hj.pdf

[104] R. M. Santilli, "Isominkowskian Gravitation and Cosmology," centerline{Contributed paper for the international meeting on} \centerline Physical Interpretation of Relativity Theory, Imperial College , London, Sept. 11-14, 1998

]105] R. M. Santilli, "Isominkowskian formnulationof gravitation and cosmology," contribuetd paper in Modertn Modified Theories of Gravitatrion and Cosmoloigy. E. I Guendelman, Editor, International Academic Press, 1998.
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/isoselfdual-cosmology.PDF

[106] Ruggero Maria Santilli, "Rudiments of IsoGravitation for Matter and its IsoDual for AntiMatter," American Journal of Modern Physics Vol. 4, No. 5, 2015, pp. 59, Special Issue I; Foundations of Hadronic Mathematics Dedicated to the 80th Birthday of Prof. R. M. Santilli
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/10.11648.j.ajmp.s.2015040501.18.pdf

[107]R. M. Santilli, "Isotopic quantization of gravity and its universal isopoincare' symmetry." in the Proceedings of "The Seventh Marcel Grossmann Meeting in Gravitation,, R. T. Jantzen, G. M. Keiser and R. Ruffini, Editors, World Scientific Publishers pages 500-505(1994).
www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-120.pdf

[p>[109] R. M. Santilli, "Unification of gravitation and elkectroweak iunteractions," in the Proceedings of the "Eight Marcel Grossmann Meeting in Gravitation,, Israel 1997, T. Piran and R. Ruffini, Editors, World Scientific, pages 473-475 (1999)
www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-137.pdf

[109] R. M. Santilli, "Relativistic hadronic mechanics: nonunitary, axiom-preserving completion of relativistic quantum mechanics," Found. Phys. Vol. 27, 625-729 (1997)
http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Santilli-15.pdf

[110] R. M. Santilli and A. O. E. Animalu, Nonunitary Lie-isotopic and Lie-admissible scattering theories of hadronic mechanics, in the Proceedings of the Third International Conference on the Lie-Admissible Treatment of Irreversible Processes, C. Corda, Editor, Kathmandu University (2011) pages 163-177
I: http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Isoscattering-I.pdf
II: http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Isoscattering-II.pdf
III: http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Isoscattering-III.pdf
IV: http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Isoscattering-IV.pdf
V: http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/Isoscattering-V.pdf