See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/266884251

Cosmology and the Door to Other Dimensions and Universes…

Article · July 2003

DOI: 10.2514/6.2003-4882

CITATIONS READS
2 1,025

2 authors, including:

P. A. Murad

64 PUBLICATIONS   171 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Celestial mechanics: Fresh solutions to the four-body problem View project

All content following this page was uploaded by P. A. Murad on 02 December 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Cosmology and the Door to Other Dimensions and Universes….

R. M. L. Baker, Jr. *
8123 Tuscany Avenue
Playa del Rey, California, USA
P. A. Murad**
Vienna, Virginia, USA

ABSTRACT

We cannot limit our space travel options to consider only approaches involving
the conventional wisdom. There is nothing more intriguing in cosmological conjectures
as the concepts of time and space within the meaning of the context “universe.” In this
paper we propose that the dimensions, which define spatial and temporal “space”, are
represented by a continuum of many dimensions and universes – an infinite number of
them. Time is not only relative, but also the discriminator or “definer” of a continuum of
these universes; time to some degree, may identify the start or closure of a separate series
of these dimensional sets that can be parallel universes or sequences of realities.
Similarly, spatial dimensions as well as gravity may also offer a portal to these different
sequences of realities. Compared to space and time, gravity may hold the key for inter-
dimensional and/or inter-universe space travel due to its multidimensional nature. Thus
we propose a framework for developing a space-time-universe fabric or STU that may
offer opportunities for inter-dimensional and/or inter-universe space-travel.

I. Introduction to the very large or the infinite fifth dimension of

Many options for space travel can
be defined by the conventional wisdom. These as
well as other approaches can be extended to include
inter-dimensional inter-universe travel, and should
be explored to determine their suitability as well as
a means of satisfying mankind’s intellectual
curiosity. The concept of an infinite number of
universes is not a new one1, but indexing them by
an infinite dimensional vector time, t, may be a
novel approach. Likewise, since there is no a priori
reason for having a particular number of
dimensions, it is not a great stretch of the
imagination to go from 4- to 5-dimensions to the
10- or 11-dimensions of string theory on up to an
infinite number of dimensions described by an
infinite dimensional vector, r. This spatial-location
vector, r, may have curled up dimensions that
include a series or continuum of spatial dimensions.
These dimensions can vary from the very small (the
“compactified” additional dimensions of Kaluza2)
__________________________________________
*
AIAA Associate Fellow
**
Aerospace Engineer, Senior Member AIAA.
"The views expressed in this article are those of the
author** and do not reflect the official policy or position of
the U.S. Government."
"Copyright 2002 by R. M. L. Baker, Jr. and P. Murad.
Published by the American Astronautical Society and
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.
with permission."
Sundrum and Randall3. Sundrum and Randall4
note: “The rest of the universe can be five-, or even
10 dimensional and we wouldn’t necessarily know
it.” Thus the state of “everything” can be given by
u(r, t). This infinitely dimensional in space and
time quantity defines the space-time-universe or
STU fabric.
According to a thumbnail sketch of
Einstein's theory of general relativity, time and
space disappear with material things. That is, matter
(stars to atomic nuclei) is inseparably connected to
time and space and vice versa within the fabric of
the space-time continuum. "Things" are all but
hills, valleys, and holes in the fabric of Einstein's
space-time. Moreover, very few individuals really
understand the depth of all of the terms within
Einstein’s equations that may offer insights
regarding a doorway or portals to other continuums.
It is conjectured that the equivalence of
inertial and attractive mass and the unification of all
forces, gravitational, electromagnetic, nuclear, etc.
is that they are all simply undulations in the
multidimensional STU fabric. We may, for
example, consider a centrifugal force field to be a
gravitational force field and elastic, thrust, drag,
etc., force fields to be electromagnetic in origin.
Arkani-Hamed, et al5 observed “... that with a
sufficiently large number of dimensions, one can
equate the fundamental gravitational and weak
interaction mass scales.” Thus force is a property of

1
the STU and vice versa. Such a concept is similar to
that expressed by Schrödinger in 1946 as reported
in Denis Brian6, in his theory that " …. purely wave
theory, in which the structure of space-time would
yield gravitation, electromagnetism, and even a
classical analog of strong nuclear (forces)". In fact,
the term "gravitational waves" could be replaced by
the term "force waves" or "inertia waves” or
“inertia currents" since it represents the change in
force, any force or attraction, or jerk of an inertial
mass that results in subsequent waves or ripples
within the STU fabric. For historical reasons,
however, the term “gravitational waves” should be
retained.
The use of the term “graviton” should be
reconsidered since it not only implies the
propagation of a “tidal’ oscillation in a gravitational
field (moving in the direction to increase or
decrease gravity) as a periodic wave of gravity, but
also implies the exclusive means for generating
gravitational waves is a gravitational force.
Moreover, time in a temporal sense, may be a
manifold that provides portals to traverse one set of
dimensional spaces for another. Additionally,
unusual natural phenomenon as outlined in
Dyatlov7-10 in his discussions on the
inhomogeneous physical vacuum, may also provide
a spatial gate to these other dimensions. There are
no rules that have been uncovered that stress
whether time or spatial dimensions would provide
such a portal but we can only select these as
possible candidates because of our own ignorance
and fear of the unknown.
II. Discussion
Before we continue, we need to provide
some basic definitions to understand the direction
of this effort. For the sake of this discussion, let us
consider our ‘current’ space-time continuum as a
reference universe. When we mention other
dimensions, we are describing different sequences
of realities. Existence is made up of several factors
which forms links in the chain of causality that
influences the senses, consciousness, drives, and
instincts. A sequence of reality also has life and
death as perceived in our current or reference
reality. Moreover, it is far too speculative to discuss
parallel universes where there are mirror images of
what we currently understand within our own
reality. For example, in this reality, Mars can be
considered as a ‘dead’ world. In a parallel
formalism, we should also expect Mars or its
representation, to also be a dead world. In the final
reality, the world that represents Mars could be
teeming with a civilization contrary to our
expectations. Thus, we need to understand this
ground-rule from the start. We are not proposing an
artificial construct and we are not interested in
science fiction!
A. Space-Time-Universe (STU) Geometry
Continuing with the thumb-nail-sketch
conjectures of the STU continuum at the most
elementary level, the equivalence of the inability to
define position and velocity simultaneously and the
inherent uncertainty in position and velocity is
simply a reflection of the fact that you can't "see"
the entire STU panorama from any one single
vantage point. As Osborne, et al, op cit (2002),
p.1417 remark: “... theory reveals that our ‘field of
view’ may be limited to a lower dimensional
membrane or brane...” This limitation is in contrast
to what is seen within the practical, experimental
inability to define position and velocity
simultaneously within a reference universe. Thus
there can be complete determinism, cause and
effect can prevail, and "God does not have to play
dice". Everything is within the STU fabric with
absolute certainty. For example, in different
universes at different times everything cannot be
"seen". A "line" cannot connect "points" in the STU
fabric, but the "points" are still there to be
connected and their resulting "motion" on the fabric
should be entirely predictable; but, unfortunately,
they can't be "seen" or predicted simultaneously
from an outside or reference universe. The more
conventional space-time continuum is embedded in
the multidimensional STU, which we conjecture
may include a multidimensional manifold.
B. Quantum Mechanics and Time
As far as quantum mechanics is
concerned, the detailed surface of the STU fabric
can be thought of as being ribbed-like or containing
several steps--essentially quantum steps. According
to this conjecture the intractable frontier lies
between “. . . a smooth spatial geometry . . . " and "
. . . the violent fluctuations of the quantum world on
short distances . . . the roiling frenzy of quantum
foam." 12-13. From our viewpoint such a
phenomenon implies that this is nothing more or
less than the interface between osculating universes
on small scales in which entities shift back and
forth at will having smooth transitions with
mass/energy and momentum conserved and entropy
held constant. Thus the measurements of the
fundamental constants in a given universe are
subject to a very small variation depending upon
"where" or "when" they are measured. In other
words, we are in a similar situation as with
Newton’s bucket where we are looking at the stars
2
and debating if the stars are moving and the Earth
his stationary or are the stars stationary and is the
Earth is rotating. This led to the theory of relativity
and, if anything, a similar approach would be
required to quantize the differences in these
universes compared to the reference or current
sequence of reality.
What would be the suitable metrics to
evaluate the differences between these parallel
universes? Could gravitational waves or inertia, or
entropy, or energy be considered as means of
correlating these multiple dimensional corridors? If
entropy is held constant, it should play no real role
in this type of process but represents a consequence
rather than a meaningful means of causality.
Entropy is still a concern if one uses a Machian
approach13a. Entropy can be a function of
gravitational cross-section or proportional to mass.
The gravitational cross-section is a measure of
effectiveness of mass transfer and the ability to
absorb gravity quanta and entropy may be a means
to relate mass and gravity in a more realistic sense.
In this regard, "where" has a more global
meaning. In the STU "where" is similar to position
in conventional space but really represents a
continuum of dimensions. On the other hand
"where and what" are time-like universe
dimensions. In "our" universe it’s simply "time-
when." These extremely simplified general
cosmological conjectures would require very
complicated mathematics in order to obtain
quantitative results and make them more than just
superficial fantasies. Such mathematics might
involve the introduction of infinite-dimensional
“tensors” that could possibly be manipulated by
some form of fuzzy logic in order to provide
explanations and make predictions based upon
experiments involving gravitational wave
generators or detectors. These multiple-dimensional
tensors would still have to obey deterministic or
stochastic relationships akin to Einstein’s equation.
At the interface among the continuum of universes,
time may no longer have a straightforward
meaning.
Three quotes set the scene for this
contemplation:
“Consider a world in which cause and effect are
erratic. Sometimes the first precedes the second,
sometimes the second the first. Or perhaps cause
lies forever in the past while effect in the future, but
future and past are entwined.”
Alan Lightman, “Einstein’s Dreams”
‘I don’t understand you,’ said Alice. ‘It’s really
dreadfully confusing.’
‘That’s the effect of living backwards,’ the Queen
said kindly. ‘It always makes one feel a little giddy
at first.’
‘Living backwards!’ Alice repeated in great
astonishment. ‘I never heard of such a thing!’
‘But there’s one great advantage to it, that one’s
memory works both ways.’
‘I’m sure mine only works one way,’ Alice
remarked. ‘I can’t remember things before they
happen.’
‘It’s a poor sort of memory that only works
backward,’ the Queen remarked.
Lewis Carroll, “Through the Looking-Glass”
“Time possesses a quality that creates a difference
between causes and effects evoked by directionality
or patterns. This property establishes the difference
between the past and the present. Causes and
results are separated by space and time.”
P. A. Murad, “It’s All Gravity ...”, STAIF 2003.
In our day-to-day experience we accept an
infinite continuum of successive or “current” or
“present” times and an infinite continuum of
“locations” or “positions” in all components of r. It
is proposed that we initially extend this concept to
an infinite continuum in t. And t is the multiple
dimension “time” location vector, possibly
including increasing time through the infinite,
continuum of universes or the multiuniverse
discussed, for example, by Greene12, op cit, 1999,
pp. 367-370, 385, and 387.
C. Gravitational Waves
Gravitational waves, according to
Maartens15, may provide the needed insights to
understand this problem. Maartens claims that
recent developments in string theory have led to a
5-dmensional warped space-time model where
standard-model fields are confined to a 3-brane or
the observed universe. Gravity can propagate into
the fifth dimension and possibly others depending
upon its energy and frequency content. As Randall,
op cit (2002), p. 1424 states: “... the gravitational
force is spreading very little in the direction
perpendicular to the brane.” Thus the observed
inverse square law remains intact. These recent
developments may offer improvements in quantum
gravity theory and the brane models, inspired by
string/M theory, imply that gravity can propagate in
3 + d dimensions where these extra dimensions
need not be compact or small. Maartens looks at the
exponential ‘warp’ factor in a non-factorizable
metric:
( )[
ds~ 2 =exp − 2 y / l − dt 2 + dx ]
~ 2 + dy 2 .
3
The tilde represents fifth dimensional quantities. If
y is not zero, this metric satisfies a 5-dmensional
Einstein equation with negative cosmological
factors. If y is zero, Maartens suggests the induced
metric on the brane is a Minkowski metric. This
would represent a boundary for the 5-dimensional
case.
Gravitational waves are related directly to
an inertial mass in motion (caused by either a
change in attraction or force--a jerk or harmonic
oscillation) and are not directly related to a residual
gravitational field. One differentiates between the
libration of a mass as described, for example in
Klemperer and Baker16 and the jerk of a mass. The
libration results in an oscillating gravitational field
or wave of gravity (such as generated by Pia
Astone, et al17 and Forward and Miller18. This
gravitational field is potentially detectable by a
device such as described by Constant14, but is not a
wave in the space-time continuum (or STU). The
librating mass generates an oscillating (time
varying, periodic) gravitational field and produces
“waves” (or tidal forces) that could be best
described by the term “gravitons”, a term which
ordinarily and less properly relates to the space-
time or STU continuum waves. The jerk-produced
gravitational waves are distortions of the space-
time fabric (or STU continuum) and are represented
by a tensor emanating from, for example, a
quadrapole. The jerk-produced gravitational waves
may or may not involve gravitational force (that is,
other forces such as electromagnetic and nuclear
could be involved). It could be better described by
the terms, “massons” or “forceons” not, as
mentioned previously, by the term “gravitons”
which more properly relates to waves of gravity.
As an example, a rapidly rotating neutron star
generates significant gravitational waves (massons
or forceons), but no appreciable oscillations in its
gravitational field. On the other hand, a mass
dipole, two masses connected by a spring, generates
no gravitational waves (see, for example, Weber20),
but can generate oscillations in its gravitational
field. By the way, an electrical-charge dipole can
generate electromagnetic (EM) waves.
When one defines the space-time
continuum, the understanding is that Einstein’s
formulation is used. Basically this is a logical
geometric representation based upon a Pythagorean
type of theorem to relate temporal space to spatial
space. The interesting point of view is that the
curvature of space-time is a function of gravitation.
Here, Einstein linearizes the trajectory problem by
ignoring the effects of gravity within the equations
but by incorporating them implicitly due to
curvature. In other words, you solve the resulting
equations, but then add in the effects due to
curvature.
This is essentially a linearization, but it
also implies a different notion. If our understanding
and mathematical representation of the space-time
continuum is correct, then gravity has a special
influence that is stronger than either that of space or
time. If this is true, then it may provide a portal
more readily than either space or time. To a degree,
this may be a concern that raises the perspective of
accurately determining the speed of a gravitational
wave based upon a conjecture made by Murad21.
He states that if light cannot leave a black hole,
then E-M radiation also cannot leave the black hole
because it travels at the same speed. The only thing
that leaves a black hole is gravity, which is
observed in the trajectory perturbations on nearby
bodies. Some radiation leaves, however, that
appears aligned along a black hole’s spin axis.
Murad also raises the conjecture that this radiation
represents ‘natural’ hyper-light phenomenon and at
sufficient distance from the black hole, will
decrease to light speed due to the gravitational
environment near the black hole. These issues need
some form of resolution to better understand these
events and their interrelationships.
There is a fundamental difference between
photons, gravitons, gluons, etc., and spin 2 forceons
or massons. The former are manifested by the
curvature of the multidimensional STU fabric
created by the attractions of forces associated with
charge, mass, nuclear particles, etc. All of these are
conjectured to be similar to gravity, that is, not
really "forces", but motion along convergent or
divergent geodesics in the multidimensional STU).
The latter is manifested by the rapid changes in the
forces or jerk associated with the former--like
cracking a whip of STU to produce ripples in the
STU fabric and as Landau and Lifshitz22(p. 355)
and Fontana23 (p. 1085) suggest, such STU fabric
distortions, caused by high-frequency GW, change
gravity (expressed as gravitons) itself.
Let us expand a little on the masson and
forceon terminology and their observation. As
noted by Hogan13, op cit (2002), pp. 425-426
“Quantum discreteness must come into play even in
the structure of time and space ... in this view
Hawking radiation converts quanta of space-time
into other forms of information-carrying energy.”
An in-depth study of primordial cosmic background
(please see for example, Brustein, et al 25),
especially from anisotropic, high-frequency
gravitational wave (HFGW) background
“splotches,” viewed through a HFGW telescope
(Baker26), may as Hogan (op cit 2002, p. 421) states
“... reveal the ‘pixelization’ of space-time.” Such
4
“pixels” could represent the discrete waves in the
STU or forceons or massons. A word on discrete
versus continuous: one can view a “continuum” as
an infinite set of discrete points or a “discrete set”
as particular “values” of a basically continuous
entity. In essence analog versus digital – a
distinction without a difference. Pragmatically, the
way in which we view continuum-universe
parameters depends upon the measuring
instruments and/or the mathematics/computers
utilized to analyze observations and/or simulate the
system.
III. Analysis
In these discussions, it is difficult to find
documented instances where data may be available
that would relate events from the past, present, and
the future. Such invaluable data would require
extensive evaluation to validate it as well as
providing the motivation to develop a suitable
theory, if possible, to explain it. We could only
come up with one real piece of such information,
which we would like to present as motivation for
this and other efforts.
There is a need to examine all of the
variables within the metric that would define a
STU. This would include special variables,
temporal variables and gravity as previously
discussed. The role of space and time, for example,
may not be so obvious. The Russian astrophysicist
Kosyrev, based upon his observations of the
heavens, did not believe that stars were driven by
thermonuclear reactions because of the low surface
temperature. To his way of thinking, stars were
machines that converted space-time into energy.
Kosyrev27-30 examined time to include theoretical
concepts, experiments on the properties of time,
and basic findings. He claimed “Time” is an
energetic property of nature and the concept of time
surpasses our imagination. It involves the most
profound and completely unknown properties of the
world. Although exact science attempts to negate
time, time possesses a quality that creates a
difference between causes and effects evoked by
directionality or patterns. This property establishes
the difference between the past and the present.
Space and time separate causes and results.
Properties of time must be measured by
experiments. Kosyrev used a different receiving
system mounted on a telescope. When directed at a
certain star, the detector registered a signal even
when a metal screen shielded the main mirror of the
telescope. This suggested a star had some
electromagnetic radiation that could not be shielded
by the screens. When the telescope was directed not
at the visible position but the true position of the
star, the detector registered an even stronger
incoming signal suggesting some of the star’s
radiation reached the detector instantaneously at
billions of times greater than the speed of light.
Moreover, Kosyrev found his detector registered an
incoming signal when the telescope was directed
toward a position that was symmetrical with the
visible position of the star relative to its true
position. This was interpreted as a detection of the
future position of the star. According to Dadaev31
of the Pulkovo Observatory who provides details
regarding these experiments, Kosyrev drew
conclusions about the reality of Minkowski
geometry. Experiments with a similar detector were
repeated a decade later separately by M. M.
Lavrentiev and A. F. Pugach. Others have
interpreted these experiments that demonstrated
results from the past, present, and the future by
claiming that stars are objects with large angular
momentum and these results were detection of
torsion field radiation.
We cannot offer any additional
explanations but feel that this is just another
example where intuitively, the influence of gravity
waves and the speed of gravitational waves may
have an influence upon this particular problem and
dataset. For example, could gravity waves
influenced the perceived location of the star when it
was viewed in its past, present, and future
positions? With these thoughts, several experiments
can be suggested.
A. Qualitative Experiments
The HFGW telescope observations of the
relic cosmic background may indeed provide
qualitative experimental insights into the concept of
an infinite manifold of universes. For example,
such observations might glimpse the “fading in and
out” of the cosmic pixels.
Under the “stress” of HFGW radiation the
actual time reversal among universes might be
perceived. For example, assuming an infinite,
continuum of universes, there could be a vacillating
or "tunneling" from one universe to another at small
scales. It is to be emphasized that the idea
presented in this paper is of a natural-philosophical
concept or conjecture and not a rigorous new
physical theory. Since time reversal as opposed to
time advancement, violates the fundamental law of
cause and effect. Each time reversal must spawn a
new universe that is nearly (due to quantum jitter)
tangent (osculating) in all dimensions (r, t) at the
time of the reversal. It is hypothesized that since the
smaller particles have a more detailed structure, that
is they may have higher dimensions, they are more
5
fragile and susceptible to STU geometry warp or
tear caused by gravitational stress related to a large
gravitational-energy or HFGW flux. Thus smaller
scale entities (possibly strings) would pop into
existence (be created) in our current universe from
a slightly future (nearly tangent or osculating)
different universe or appear from the past in the
current universe. Such smaller scale entities would
vanish or disappear into the past into a slightly
earlier (nearly tangent or osculating) spawned
universe or into the future in the current universe.
In this fashion the rule of cause and effect will not
be violated and we will not have chaos.
It is anticipated that the warp of the STU,
which is a subset of the conventional space-time
continuum or geometry geodesic, can be created by
the relatively strong (continuous as opposed to
alternating) gravitational waves generated by a
large gravitational-energy flux. Such a flux can be
created from the HFGW generation devices
described in Baker, op cit (2000). This device may
facilitate such a time reversal/advancement process.
It is expected that through use of such devices the
creation and disappearance of entities will occur at
scales large enough to be detectable and will
validate or invalidate the concept of the STU
geometry described herein.
Consider a hypothetical in which a
sequence of events is represented by an imaginary
horse race involving 1,000 thoroughbreds. All
horses come out of the starting gate at the same
instant of time and their progress (measured in our
“nominal” universe) is followed thereafter in a
statistical fashion. That is, although individual
horses may change their relative position in the
“pack” there will be a moving histogram of the
distribution of the horses about some median point
that moves along the track. Assuming no
interaction among the horses and that their
capabilities are randomly distributed, the moving
histogram of relative horse location will be
assumed Gaussian.
Let us now warp the STU geodesic by the
continuous gravitational-energy flux created by an
HFGW generator. Let us suppose that in a random
fashion 20 percent of the horses (200) are Time
Travelers: 100 will travel to various future times in
the same universe and 100 will travel back in time
to a different, osculating universe (s). Assuming
that the conservation of mass (energy) prevails and
that entropy remains either the same or increases
during the universe-to-universe, time-traveling
events, an equal number of horses will appear on
the track from the past of the same universe or from
the future of an osculating universe. Since the
universes originating the replacement horses are
either the same or tangent to the nominal universe
of our race, those from the past will tend to appear
behind in the pack (closer to the starting gate) and
those from the future will appear to be ahead in the
pack (closer to the finish). Thus a statistical study
of the race histograms with and without the intense
gravitational-energy flux should reveal the
percentage of the imaginary time-traveling horses
and at what times they are “plucked” from the
current and past universes.
Several different real-physical-event
proxies could be utilized in lieu of the imaginary
horse race. These include the dispersion of a light
pulse, radioactive decay prompted by some
triggering mechanism, dispersion of pulses of a
particle beam, possibly even the single-electron
capacity spectroscopy (see Zhitenev et al,32 ), etc.
Statistical measures are utilized to test the concept
in order to average out quantum jitters and allow
for a “view” of the activity of the wave/particles on
very small scales without actually “viewing” them
as individuals. It will, of course, be important to
analyze whether or not the “replacement horses”
will, in fact, show up in different places along the
pack histogram or whether they will simply fill-in
the same positions as the original time-traveling
horses that are “plucked” from or “squished” off
the racetrack and, therefore, provide no useful
information. An object of the present concept will
be to determine whether or not such histograms
and/or dispersion changes with and without the
presence of an intense continuous gravitational-
energy flux represents an example of the use of the
HFGW in studying physical theories, concepts and
conjectures.
B. Space Travel
Let us return to our original concept of a
new approach to space travel. We will consider a
“Gedanken” or "thought experiment" that will
differ from actual experiments, as discussed in the
preceding section. We will require greater latitude
for our imagination. That is, we will not be as
constrained to specific physical mechanisms.
We suppose we are able to transfer (travel
or tunnel) from one universe to another at, say, an
osculation point. Let us consider such a point as a
region of tangency between the two different
realities. Our purpose might be to travel to a galaxy
one million light-years distant or to go backwards
or forwards in time one million years from now. In
order to preserve cause and effect to prevent having
a chaotic universe, such space travel would not be
allowed, but we can do the next best thing.
Suppose that we have available three identical
universes. Let's call them A and B. Suppose,
6
however, that universe B is either offset by one
million light-years or by one million years
(whichever r, t, destination we wish to achieve).
We first make the transition from universe A to
universe B and collect all the observations that we
wish and then transit (or tunnel) back to universe B.
Allow us to digress on the subject of
communication. It seems quite obvious that the
preferred means for communication, especially
interstellar communication, will be by high-
frequency gravitational waves (HFGW). Certainly
one would not choose electromagnetic radiation
(EM) because of its considerable attenuation and
background noise. Thus the Search for
Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) is listening for
the wrong type of signal. So Drs. Cruise33 and
Gemme34 crank up your HFGW receivers and listen
for signals from a spacecraft incoming from another
universe!
Another topic requires discussion as well.
If one thinks of the birth of the universe, one may
have a large explosion that surrounds an implosion.
Along the boundaries of these two events, the speed
of signal propagation based upon the speed of
sound may be significantly altered because of the
differences of the flow dynamics. There is an
interesting analog that is of concern regarding the
issue of space travel. It is speculated that when a
gravitational field interacts with an anti-
gravitational field, the speed of light may go to zero
along the boundaries where these two fields
intersect. If this is the case, than if you enter along
a point on part of this boundary, you may be
teleported to another location along the boundary.
Pelton35 teleportation represents an interesting idea
and may warrant additional investigation.
Finally, some thoughts may be warranted
from a metaphysical standpoint35: “Where does it
say that we are allowed to see the face of God let
alone think that we, with all of our limitations, can
dare comprehend the infinite? We place ourselves
and mankind on unfamiliar ground in a forbidden
country. If these mysteries can be revealed, they
will be done so in God’s own time, place and
choosing. We have no other option but to hope,
think and wait. It is a shame that we cannot look
into the future, but all we can do is wait.”
IV. Conclusions
It is difficult to find and document suitable
evidence that relates or find a manifold that
connects the past, present, and future in a current
reality. The reason is that the technology or the
concepts are not there to perform such a task. Our
intention here is to take an initial step and look at
these possibilities and determine potential gate or
portal keepers that would allow inter-dimensional
space-travel. At this point we can only suggest that
in order to analyze our conjecture we must answer
several questions such as:
• How do we cross into (or tunnel into) other
sequences of realities – other universes?
• What about the fundamental difference
between mass or gravity currents or waves of
gravity and gravitational waves in the STU?
• What kinds of mathematics and mathematical
tools can deal analytically with these
conjectures? What happens when we have an
event horizon with a hypothetical anti-gravity
field that comes in contact with a gravity field?
Would you be willing to undergo teleportation?
And this list of questions is only the beginning!
NOTES AND REFERENCES:
1. As noted by Max Tegmark {(2002), “Measuring
Space-time: From the Big Bang to Black Holes,”
Science, Vol. 296, 24 May, p.1429} “... another
possibility is that the Planck density was never
attained and that there was no beginning, just an
eternal fractal mess of replicating inflating bubbles
with our observed space-time merely being one in
an infinite ensemble of regions where inflation has
stopped.” He references A. Vilenkin (1995), Phys.
Rev. D., T4, p.846 and A. D. Linde (1990), Particle
Physics and Inflationary Cosmology, Harwood
Chur, Switzerland. Also Ian Osborne, Linda
Rowan, and Robert Coontz {(2002), “Space-time,
Warped Branes, and Hidden Dimensions,” Science,
Vol. 296, 24 May, p. 1417}remark on Steinhart’s
“... pulsating-universe model posits that pairs of
branes may trigger a series of big bangs as they
collide again and again ... “ thereby generating an
infinite number of universes.
2. T. Kaluza (1921), Preuss. Akad. Wiss., p. 966.
3. Lisa Randall and S. Sundrum (1999), Phys. Rev.
Lett., Vol. 83, p. 3370.
4. Lisa Randall (2002), “Extra Dimensions and
Warped Geometries,” Science, Vol. 296, 24 May,
p. 1422.
5. N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos, and G. Dvali,
(1998), Phys. Lett. B, Vol. 429, p.96.
6. Denis Brian (1996), Einstein a life, John Wiley
and Sons, p.351.
7. V. L. Dyatlov: Polarization Model of the
Inhomogeneous Physical Vacuum, Novosibirsk
Institute of Mathematics Publishing House, 1998
(in English).
8. V. L. Dyatlov: Electrogravimetric Energy
Transformation, Moscow, NT-Center, 1995, 29 pp.
7
9. V. L. Dyatlov, Dmitriev, and Merkulov… Private
communications and V. I. Merkulov: Known and
Unknown Hydrodynamics, Nauka, Moscow 1989.
10. A. N. Dmitriev, V. L. Dyatlov:
Nonhomogeneous Physical Vacuum Model and
Natural Self-Luminous Objects, Novosibirsk, Rus.
Acad. Sci. Sib. Branch Inst. Of Math., 1995, 31 pp.
11. Osborne
12. Brian Greene (1999), The elegant universe,
Norton, New York, p. 129.
13. Also as Craig J. Hogan {(2002), “Observing the
Beginning of Time,” American Scientist, Vol. 90,
No. 5, p.423} states: “... even the emptiest vacuum
state is roiling with fluctuations of ‘virtual
particles’ emerging and then disappearing back into
the vacuum ...”
13a. A. Alfononos-Faus: “Entropy in the Universe:
A New Approach”, Proceedings of the XXIII
Spanish Relativity Meeting on Reference Frames
and Gravitomagnetism, 6-9 September, ISBN 981-
02-4631-5.
14. Greene
15. B. Maartens (2000), “Geometry and Dynamics
of the Brane-World”, Proceedings of the XXIII
Spanish Relativity Meeting on Reference Frames
and Gravitomagnetism, 6-9 September, ISBN 981-
02-4631-5.
16. W. B. Klemperer and R. M. L. Baker, Jr.
(1957), “Satellite Librations,” Astronautica Acta,
Volume 3, pp. 17-25.
17. Pia Astone, et al (1991), “Evaluation and
Preliminary Measurement of Interaction of a
Dynamical Gravitational Near Field with a
Cryogenic G. W. Antenna,” Zeischrift fuer Physik
C, Volume 50, pp. 21-29.
18. L. Forward and L. R. Miller (1966),
“Generation and detection of dynamic
gravitational-gradient fields,” Hughes Research
Laboratories Report dated August 5, pp.512-518.
19. James Constant (1990), “Gravitational Mass
Detector,” U. S. Patent Number 4,920,313, April
24.
20. J. Weber (1964), “Gravitational Waves” in
Gravitation and Relativity, Chapter 5, pp. 90-105,
W. A. Benjamin, Inc., New York.
21. Murad, P. A.: "Hyper-Light Dynamics and the
Effects of Relativity, Gravity, Electricity and
Magnetism", IAF Paper No. 99-S.6.02 presented at
the 50th International Astronautical Congress in
Amsterdam, the Netherlands, Oct. 4-8, 1999.
22. L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz (1975), The
Classical Theory of Fields, Fourth Revised English
Edition, Pergamon Press, pp. 348, 349, 355-357.
23. Giorgio Fontana (2000), “Gravitational
Radiation and its Application to Space Travel,”
paper CP 504, Space Technology and Applications
International Forum – 2000, edited by M. S. Genk,
American Institute of Physics.
24. Hogan
25 R. Brustein, M. Gasperini, M. Giovannini, and
G. Veneziano (1995), “Relic gravitational waves
from string cosmology,” Physics Letters B, 361, pp.
45-51.
26. Robert M. L. Baker, Jr. (2000), “Preliminary
tests of fundamental concepts associated with
Gravitational-Wave spacecraft propulsion,”
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Paper 2000-5250, revised August 19, 2001, pp. 45-
47.
27. Korotaev, S. M., Serdyuk, V. O., Sorokin, M.
O.: ”Experimental Verification of Kosyrev’s
Interaction of Natural Processes”, Galilean
Electrodynamics & GED East, Volume 11, Special
Issues 2, Fall 2000, pp. 23-28.
28. Korotaev, S. M.: ”The Force of Time”, Galilean
Electrodynamics & GED East, Volume 11, Special
Issues 2, Fall 2000, pp. 29-33.
29. Kosyrev, N. A.: “Possibility of Experimental
Study of the Properties of Time”, JPRS: 45238, 2
May 1968; Pulkovo, O Vozmozhnosti
Eksperimental’Nogo Issledovaniya Svoystv
Vremeni, Russia, Sept 1967, pp. 1-49.
30. Parshin, Pavel F.: “Preface to the Kosyrev
Issues”, Galilean Electrodynamics & GED East,
Volume 11, Special Issues No. 1, Spring, 2000, pp.
3.
31. Dadaev, A. N.: “Astrophysics and Casual
Mechanics”, Galilean Electrodynamics & GED
East, Volume 11, Special Issues No. 1, Spring,
2000, pp. 4-7.
32. Zhitenev et al,17 Science, Zhitenev et al,17
Science, Vol. 285, pp. 715-718.
33. A. M. Cruise (2000), “An electromagnetic
detector for very-high-frequency gravitational
waves,” Class. Quantum Gravity, Volume 17, pp.
2525-2530.
34. Phillippe Bernard, Gianluca Gemme, R. Parodi,
and E. Picasso (2001), “A Detector of Small
Harmonic Displacements Based on Two Coupled
Microwave Cavities,” Review of Scientific
Instruments, Volume 72, Number 5, May, pp.
2428-2437.
35. Private communications during 2002 with Mr.
R. W. Pelton regarding his desire to publish an
article concerning views of the universe titled:
“Space: the first Frontier”.
8
 NOMENCLATURE

MEDIUM WAVE REPRESENTATION PARTICLE

REPRESENTATION

Conventional Proposed Conventional Proposed

or or
Preferred Preferred

Spacetime Gravitational Spacetime graviton forceon

Fabric Wave Wave or
or (For historical masson
Continuum reasons use
“Gravitational
Wave”)

Gravitational __ Wave of Gravity __

Field

Vacuum E-M wave photon

Water Gravity wave __

Tidal wave
Wind wave

.
.
.

View publication stats