David M. Rountree  

Hey everyone. I realize it has been a long time since I wrote a personal blog, but to tell you the truth, I have been working on a book and writing a blog sort of takes the back seat when competing with that endeavor. I am not yet finished, but have taken time out to write this, as it has to do with an experience I recently had.

Specifically, I had a very unusual thing occur while I was in Williamsburg, Va. Labor Day weekend. I was in a house built in 1690. I watched a pewter salt shaker (kind of heavy) slide across a table by itself. I had a very high EMF modulating between 6 Hz and 9 Hz and appeared to be generated from approximately two feet off the floor about two feet ENE of the center of the room, based on triangulation readings from my three field detectors. This spontaneous EMF just materialized in thin air with no apparent source. Ion count, both positive and negative increased dramatically over 500%.

At the end I had a short burst of gamma radiation, about 350 mRADs

Now here is what that translates into with physics....Special thanks to Tony Bermanseder!

350 mrad=3.5 milliJoules for N.f=E/h~5.25x10^30 Hz

Now fine-structure this 'frequency-energy' equivalent into the measured gamma frequencies, say the basis ZPE (Zero Point Energy)-electron/positron frequency of 2.5x10^20 Hz. The observed energy is equal to so 20 billion electron-positron annihilations. Since the 'telekinetic' movement has no external energy input as source the energy supplied derives from the ZPE as stated.

The positional calibrations are varied, as holofractal magnification/diminution can apply on many scales. One very important boundary condition is the Schumann Harmonics. The perimeter of the earth is 40,000 km as a light path on the surface and has a Schumann basis of 7.5 Hz (300,000,000 km/s/40,000km). Consequently, at this frequency, otherwise 'obscured' phenomena will occur. This frequency also allows the light-matter interaction (characterized in the probability of the electromagnetic alpha fine-structure constant as 1 in 137) to maximize.

Another important calibration parameter is the 'size' of the 'merkabah', being the Sqrt(15) as wavelength for a frequency of 77.46 MHz. This 'merkabah' frequency then is in harmonic to the Schumann frequency in 1:10^7. The Schumann frequency so has a minimum at 7.5; but many other resonances and harmonics.

 So called 'paranormal' phenomena depend on a given region of space-time to become temporarily 'isolated' to partake in the holofractal nature of the universe.

 What I have observed, so represents such an isolation, most likely having become 'induced' by either some 'emotional, say suppressed' energy or possibly from a transmitter at least 2 million kilometers from the center of the earth. Or quite simply, a "ghost".

The Force required for the movement derives as follows:

F=dp/dt=d(mv)/dt=mdv/dt+vdm/dt

Use m=moGamma=(hf/c^2)/Sqrt(1-[v/c]^2)=(hf/c^2)/Sqrt(u)=(hf/c^2).f(u,v,t)

dm/dt=(dm/du)(du/dt)  and where u(v)=1-[v/c]^2  for du/dv=-2v/c^2

dm/dt={(hf/c^2)(-1/2)Gamma^3}(-2v/c^2)dv/dt

F={dv/dt}(m+[hfv^2/c^4]Gamma^3) as the relativistic extension of Newton's Law.

The first part applies to a constancy in mass m and the second engages special relativity. However this assumes that the frequency f remains constant as photonic inertia f=mc^2/h.

Then allowing the frequency f to vary:

F= dp/dt=d(hfv/c^2 Gamma)/dt=(h/c^2){f.d[vGamma]/dt + vGamma.df/dt}

F=(h/c^2){f.(v^2/c^2+1-v^2/c^2)Gamma^3.dv/dt + vGamma.df/dt}

F=(h/c^2){fGamma^3.dv/dt + vGamma.df/dt}

F= mGamma^3.dv/dt + (hvgroup/c^2).Gamma.df/dt)

F= Standard Acceleration Force + Quantum Alpha-Force; the latter normally 'occultized' due to the minuteness of the multiplier (h/c^2~10^-50).

 The resonance or wormhole time differential for frequency is the entropy counter 9x10^60 as the square of the source frequency (of the wormhole).

In plain English, there is a very good chance I discovered an interdimensional wormhole.

I also know from personal experience, that the manifestation of a 4th spatial dimension superimposes onto the ordinary Minkowski metric. As said, the requirement for such a dimensional intersection (3D+T with 4D+T) is the encapsulation of a region of space.

This region is quantized in the following manner:

VolumexAngular Acceleration (df/dt)=NxUniversal Constant=NxElectron-Diameterxc^2

V3=2pi^2R^3  as dV4/dR  for V4=pi^2R^4/2

Then the normal hyperspace vector is: R/4 related to the Planck-Area quantization of Black Holes (The surface area of a BH is quantized in Planck-Areas/4 as entropy count).

It is now possible to calculate the maximum resonance state for maximum entropy df/dt=fmax^2 and which crystallizes the wormhole boundary, ie. the Black Holes Inner Event Horizon and amenable to both activation as a sourced White Hole or a Sinked Black Hole.

For N=1 then; V=500/9x10^60=5.555x10^-59 cubic meters (or 'quarto' meters in V4)

For V3:    R3=1.41x10^-20 meters as Compton-Radius with energy 14.03 TeV (yes this is the maximum energy for the LHC at Geneva, thus designed)

For V4 :  R4=1.832x10^-15 meters and a 'reduced' energy of  frequency 2.6x10^22 Hz or 0.11 GeV.

Recalling, that the calculations above invoke the maximum resonance state it nevertheless becomes apparent, that the practical utility of wormholes should engage the muon-mass (about 106 MeV), which then becomes coupled to the base-pionic quark-antiquark associations either charged (pion+- ~140MeV) or neutral (pion0~135 MeV).

Now the truly exciting thing about this is it throws open a new physics, because of the manner the quantum geometry (or blueprints) arrange the wave-functions of the quarks, coupled top leptonic rings.

 The muon is a 'heavy' electron, due to the fact, that the up-down coupling is energy wise insufficient to transverse the nucleon diameter (about 5 fermi as an electron probability distribution and about 3 fermi as the size of a proton).

So forming resonance states of the up-quark as a charm quark and a resonance state for the down quark as a strange quark, will increase this energy to the required levels.

Detailed analysis then reveals how the unitary SU(3) symmetry of the standard model 'falls into place' as emergence of the quark-lepton family couplings.

There is a conundrum in regards to the wormhole utility however.

 Quantum mechanics is precisely applicable and useful at the (3 fermi) scale of the classical electron radius, say in QED.

At larger scales, the quantum field theories come into play and with it the 'classical electron' is rendered as a 'point particle' with the associated difficulties of renormalization and finitization of working parameters, such as position and momentum.

Now in the calculation above, the 'muonic electron' requires a frequency of so 2.6x10^22 Hz for a 4-Radius vector of 1.8x10^-15 meters (2/3rds of the electron radius).

Therefore the requirement becomes a change in the frequency of the 'muonic electron' to accommodate a 'matching' of the frequency upon a quantized holofractal background.

In the case above, decreasing the muonic electron frequency by a factor of 1.51 would attain this harmonization between the 3-dimensional electron limit and its 4-dimensional extension. Then a frequency of 1.72x10^22 Hz would be able to 'tap' into the matrix-background defined 'classical electron radius' also at that frequency Eigenstate.

But most important, the 4th spatial (Kaluza-Klein) dimension of the hyperspace must become congruent with the 3rd spatial Riemann dimension for the 'phenomena' to manifest.

This physics is wormhole physics only in its fundamentals; what I term wormholes opening up and closing is the dimensional intersection of the Kaluza-Klein 5D with the Minkowski 4D. While I am fond of parallel universes, I realize they are not necessary, and now consider the hyperspace intersecting the Minkowski space. 

Multiverses are a physical reality, however they remain 'frozen' until the Minkowski metric naturally 'opens' up the 4-radius as described in the above.

Then all of the spacetime presently embedded in an 11-dimensional 'Strominger Matrix' of extremal Black Hole Equivalence becomes 5-dimensional, with the 'opening of wormholes' as portals and conduits into outer space and 'higher dimensions' becoming 'common place'. Hence the wormhole is a dimension in and of itself creating a connecting web that allows for entanglement to be possible. The c-invariance will hold, however due to the 4-Radius and the volumar quantization indicated above, the 'tyranny of the metric', will become infused by a 'easement of the de Broglie phasechanges' with 'Velocity' as the light path/time also becoming a scale factor R(n) multiplied by frequency modulators {V=R(n)F}.

Or then again, maybe not.

BUT I do have an extraordinary headache.

By Andrew Chaikin
Editor, Space & Science

The irresistible, mind-boggling fantasy comes to just about everyone, sooner or later: What if everything we knew, our whole universe, was just a speck of dust on someone’s shoulder?

Of course, that’s not an idea astronomers take seriously. But many cosmologists are giving serious thought to a more scientific question: Do other universes exist?

At first glance, you can’t help but wonder how anyone could have the chutzpah to ask a question like that. We can barely figure out this universe, and now we’re wondering about others?

Believe it or not, theorists have an answer. And the answer appears to be, Yes.

To understand why, you have to go back to the Big Bang, that mysterious, mother-of-all-explosions that most astronomers believe spawned our universe. One second, according to theory, there was nothingness. The next, our cosmos sprang into existence. Nature seems to have pulled off the feat of getting something — in fact, everything — for nothing.

As unimaginable as that sounds, it comes straight out of the theory of quantum mechanics, a set of mathematical rules that describe how the universe works on the smallest scales, inside atoms. Quantum mechanics says that matter and energy can appear spontaneously out of the vacuum of space, thanks to something called a quantum fluctuation, a sort of hiccup in the energy field thought to pervade the cosmos.

Cosmologists say that a quantum fluctuation gave rise to the Big Bang. And the thing about quantum fluctuations is that they can happen anywhere, any time. And if our universe was born out of a quantum fluctuation, say theorists, then it’s possible that other quantum fluctuations could have spawned other universes.

There’s a reason some theorists want other universes to exist: They believe it’s the only way to explain why our own universe, whose physical laws are just right to allow life, happens to exist. According to the so-called anthropic principle, there are perhaps an infinite number of universes, each with its own set of physical laws. And one of them happens to be ours. That’s much easier to believe, say the anthropic advocates, than a single universe “fine-tuned” for our existence.

But there’s a problem. If these other universes exist, there’s no way for us to detect them.

Of course, as University of Arizona astronomer Chris Impey points out, there are parts of our own cosmos that we can’t observe, because light from those extremely distant realms hasn’t had time to reach us. “We know that our own physical universe is substantially, maybe enormously larger, than the visible universe,” Impey says.

That doesn’t mean, however, that Impey is prepared to accept the idea of other universes. For one thing, he says, cosmologists don’t really understand the nature of quantum fluctuations, “because we dont have any quantum gravity theory yet.” That means the idea of multiple fluctuations, and multiple universes, is “truly speculative.”

Other astronomers are even more forceful in their resistance to the idea.

“It’s not a testable idea,” says Paul Steinhardt of Princeton University. Because the different universes would not be detectable by one another, he says, “You can’t really prove it exists or doesn’t exist.” When you talk about multiple universes, Steinhardt says, you’re not talking about science anymore. “In my view, you’re into metaphysics.”

Not everyone rejects the multiple-universe idea out of hand. At the University of California, Virginia Trimble is more accepting. “I find it neat. In much the same way that I think it would be neat if there were reincarnation.”

Not exactly a resounding scientific endorsement.

But Andreas Albrecht, a cosmologist at the University of California at Davis, says the question isn’t open for debate. Why? You can’t argue with quantum mechanics. “As far as we can tell,” Albrecht says, “that’s the fundamental language that Nature speaks. Nature doesn’t answer questions for certain; it answers questions by giving probabilities.”

And in quantum mechanics, “There’s a possibility that almost anything happens.” Including other universes. And if cosmologists are queasy about that, they don’t have a choice. “It comes out of the mathematics,” Albrecht explains. “It’s forced down our throats.”

“Quantum mechanics will not give up these other alternatives on its own,” says Albrecht. “And we really don’t know what to make about that. On one hand it sounds totally metaphysical. On the other hand, it’s all we have to work with at the moment.”

So, how would Albrecht answer Impey, and Steinhardt, and others who challenge the idea of a multiple universe?

“I would say, ‘Your instincts are great, but do something with them. Give me a theory that doesn’t have multiple universes.’ And they’d be stuck.”

That’s not to say Albrecht agrees with the anthropic advocates. All the “fine-tuning” which they believe is too good to be true, is only true for life as we know it. Of the advocates, Albrecht says, “They don’t know a thing about life. They don’t know what it takes to have life in the universe. There could be forms of life out there that we haven’t even thought of! It’s really stupid.”

There is no shortage of published scientific papers, articles, and books on the anthropic theory, including some by experienced cosmologists. And there’s some good science involved in these studies, Albrecht says, if you take out the stuff about the anthropic principle.

“People get into these studies because they are intrigued because there are real scientific issues to address. Then they say, ‘Oh, this looks familiar, I’d better call it anthropic,’ and they start using all these buzz words. But they [alienate] a large part of the scientific community when they do that. It’s a kind of sloppiness.”

“Science is about trying not to be sloppy, but it’s hard because we’re human. This is an example of our humanity creeping in and getting in the way of sheer rationality. I think with time it will get much better.”

“In the end,” Albrecht says, “we may understand that there are a bunch of other universes, but it won’t be the way the anthropic guys want. There’s a lot of room between the total smorgasbord that the anthropic people want, and just having a few extra universes around.”

But if these other universes do exist, are we really destined never to detect them? Some theorists have speculated that gravitational energy from other universes might leak into ours, and that someday we might figure out how to detect it. But even the most open-minded cosmologists say that’s a long shot at best.

“That is also pure speculation,” says Impey. “It’s maybe reasonable speculation, but it’s speculation in a very similar vein to the speculation of someone like Kip Thorne about wormholes and time travel and white holes and black holes. It’s very careful speculation by a highly trained theoretical physicist who knows what the boundary of the current theory is.”

It wouldn’t be the first time that a wild idea turned out to be right.

A bit more than 100 years ago, in the second half of the 19th century, Albrecht says, most scientists didn’t accept the idea that matter was composed of atoms — an idea supported not by direct observation, but by inferences based on theories of temperature, heat, and viscosity.

“Atomic theory had some great things to say about that, and seemed to give a consistent, unified picture,” Albrecht says, but “the majority of physicists at that time didn’t really believe atoms existed; they thought it was just some flight of fancy.”

Like quantum mechanics, Albrecht ponts out, atomic theory was a construction that went way beyond what anyone could see 100 years ago. And if it’s a challenge for scientists now to embrace wild ideas like other universes, he says, that just comes with the territory.

“So far, everything we’ve done to try to understand the universe has pulled us out of our shell, so to speak, and made us think about things that are way beyond what we see, and way beyond what we’ll see in the foreseeable future. So we’re just stuck with that… Unfortunately, it’s part of the nature of always being at the frontier of what we understand.”

Dr. Machio Kaku
http://mkaku.org/home/?page_id=423

Will these concepts be proven by a theory of everything?
Last June, astronomers were toasting each other with champagne glasses in laboratories around the world, savoring their latest discovery. The repaired $2 billion Hubble Space Telescope, once the laughing stock of the scientific community, had snared its most elusive prize: a black hole. But the discovery of the Holy Grail of astrophysics may also rekindle a long simmering debate within the physics community. What lies on the other side of a black hole? If someone foolishly fell into a black hole, will they be crushed by its immense gravity, as most physicists believe, or will they be propelled into a parallel universe or emerge in another time era? To solve this complex question, physicists are opening up one of the most bizarre and tantalizing chapters in modern physics. They have to navigate a minefield of potentially explosive theories, such as the possibility of “wormholes,” “white holes,” time machines, and even the 10th dimension! This controversy may well validate J.B.S. Haldane’s wry observation that the universe is “not only queerer than we sup- pose, it is queerer than we can suppose.” This delicious controversy, which delights theoretical physicists but boggles the mind of mere mortals, is the subject of my recent book, Hyperspace.

Black Holes: Collapsed Stars
A black hole, simply put, is a massive, dead star whose gravity is so intense than even light cannot escape, hence its name. By definition, it can’t be seen, so NASA scientists focused instead on the tiny core of the galaxy M87, a super massive “cosmic engine” 50 million light years from earth. Astronomers then showed that the core of M87 consisted of a ferocious, swirling maelstrom of superhot hydrogen gas spinning at l.2 million miles per hour. To keep this spinning disk of gas from violently flying apart in all directions, there had to be a colossal mass concentrated at its center, weighing as much as 2 to 3 billion suns! An object with that staggering mass would be massive enough to prevent light from escaping. Ergo, a black hole.

The Einstein-Rosen Bridge
But this also revives an ongoing controversy surrounding black holes. The best description of a spinning black hole was given in 1963 by the New Zealand mathematician Roy Kerr, using Einstein’s equations of gravity. But there is a quirky feature to his solution. It predicts that if one fell into a black hole, one might be sucked down a tunnel (called the “Einstein-Rosen bridge”) and shot out a “white hole” in a parallel universe! Kerr showed that a spinning black hole would collapse not into a point, but to a “ring of fire.” Because the ring was spinning rapidly, centrifugal forces would keep it from collapsing. Remarkably, a space probe fired directly through the ring would not be crushed into oblivion, but might actually emerge unscratched on the other side of the Einstein-Rosen bridge, in a parallel universe. This “wormhole” may connect two parallel universes, or even distant parts of the same universe.

Through the Looking Glass
The simplest way to visualize a Kerr wormhole is to think of Alice’s Looking Glass. Anyone walking through the Looking Glass would be transported instantly into Wonderland, a world where animals talked in riddles and common sense wasn’t so common.

The rim of the Looking Glass corresponds to the Kerr ring. Anyone walking through the Kerr ring might be transported to the other side of the universe or even the past. Like two Siamese twins joined at the hip, we now have two universes joined via the Looking Glass. Some physicists have wondered whether black holes or worm- holes might someday be used as shortcuts to another sector of our universe, or even as a time machine to the distant past (making possible the swashbuckling exploits in Star Wars). However, we caution that there are skeptics. The critics concede that hundreds of wormhole solutions have now been found to Einstein’s equations, and hence they cannot be lightly dismissed as the ravings of crack pots. But they point out that wormholes might be unstable, or that intense radiation and sub-atomic forces surrounding the entrance to the wormhole would kill anyone who dared to enter. Spirited debates have erupted between physicists concerning these wormholes. Unfortunately, this controversy cannot be re- solved, because Einstein’s equations break down at the center of black holes or wormholes, where radiation and sub-atomic forces might be ferocious enough to collapse the entrance. The problem is Einstein’s theory only works for gravity, not the quantum forces which govern radiation and sub-atomic particles. What is needed is a theory which embraces both the quantum theory of radiation and gravity simultaneously. In a word, to solve the problem of quantum black holes, we need a “theory of everything!”

A Theory of Everything?
One of the crowning achievements of 20th century science is that all the laws of physics, at a fundamental level, can be summarized by just two formalisms: (1) Einstein’s theory of gravity, which gives us a cosmic description of the very large, i.e. galaxies, black holes and the Big Bang, and (2) the quantum theory, which gives us a microscopic description of the very small, i.e. the microcosm of sub-atomic particles and radiation. But the supreme irony, and surely one of Nature’s cosmic jokes, is that they look bewilderingly different; even the world’s greatest physicists, including Einstein and Heisenberg, have failed to unify these into one. The two theories use different mathematics and different physical principles to describe the universe in their respective domains, the cosmic and the microscopic. Fortunately, we now have a candidate for this theory. (In fact, it is the only candidate. Scores of rival proposals have all been shown to be inconsistent.) It’s called “superstring theory,” and almost effortlessly unites gravity with a theory of radiation, which is required to solve the problem of quantum wormholes. The superstring theory can explain the mysterious quantum laws of sub-atomic physics by postulating that sub-atomic particles are really just resonances or vibrations of a tiny string. The vibrations of a violin string correspond to musical notes; likewise the vibrations of a superstring correspond to the particles found in nature. The universe is then a symphony of vibrating strings. An added bonus is that, as a string moves in time, it warps the fabric of space around it, producing black holes, wormholes, and other exotic solutions of Einstein’s equations. Thus, in one stroke, the superstring theory unites both the theory of Einstein and quantum physics into one coherent, compelling picture.

A 10 Dimensional Universe
The curious feature of superstrings, however, is that they can only vibrate in 10 dimensions. This is, in fact, one of the reasons why it can unify the known forces of the universe: in 10 dimensions there is “more room” to accommodate both Einstein’s theory of gravity as well as sub-atomic physics. In some sense, previous attempts at unifying the forces of nature failed because a standard four dimensional theory is “too small” to jam all the forces into one mathematical framework. To visualize higher dimensions, consider a Japanese tea garden, where carp spend their entire lives swimming on the bottom of a shallow pond. The carp are only vaguely aware of a world beyond the surface. To a carp “scientist,” the universe only consists of two dimensions, length and width. There is no such thing as “height.” In fact, they are incapable of imagining a third dimension beyond the pond. The word “up” has no meaning for them. (Imagine their distress if we were to suddenly lift them out of their two dimensional universe into “hyperspace,” i.e. our world!) However, if it rains, then the surface of their pond becomes rippled. Although the third dimension is beyond their comprehension, they can clearly see the waves traveling on the pond’s surface. Likewise, although we earthlings cannot “see” these higher dimensions, we can see their ripples when they vibrate. According to this theory, “light” is nothing but vibrations rippling along the 5th dimension. By adding higher dimensions, we can easily accommodate more and more forces, including the nuclear forces. In a nutshell: the more dimensions we have, the more forces we can accommodate. One persistent criticism of this theory, however, is that we do not see these higher dimensions in the laboratory. At present, every event in the universe, from the tiniest sub-atomic decay to exploding galaxies, can be described by 4 numbers (length, width, depth, and time), not 10 numbers. To answer this criticism, many physicists believe (but cannot yet prove) that the universe at the instant of the Big Bang was in fact fully 10 dimensional. Only after the instant of creation did 6 of the 10 dimensions “curled up” into a ball too tiny to observe. In a real sense, this theory is really a theory of creation, when the full power of 10 dimensional space-time was manifest.

21st Century Physics
Not surprisingly, the mathematics of the 10th dimensional superstring is breathtakingly beautiful as well as brutally complex, and has sent shock waves through the mathematics community. Entirely new areas of mathematics have been opened up by this theory. Unfortunately, at present no one is smart enough to solve the problem of a quantum black hole. As Edward Witten of the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton has claimed, “String theory is 21st century physics that fell accidentally into the 20th century.” However, 21st century mathematics necessary to solve quantum black holes has not yet been discovered! However, since the stakes are so high, that hasn’t stopped teams of enterprising physicists from trying to solve superstring theory. Already, over 5,000 papers have been written on the subject. As Nobel laureate Steve Weinberg said, “how can anyone expect that many of the brightest young theorists would not work on it?” Progress has been slow but steady. Last year, a significant breakthrough was announced. Several groups of physicists independently announced that string theory can completely solve the problem of a quantum black hole. (However, the calculation was so fiendishly difficult it could only be performed in two, not 10, dimensions.) So that’s where we stand today. Many physicists now feel that it’s only a matter of time before some enterprising physicist completely cracks this ticklish problem. The equations, although difficult, are well-defined. So until then, it’s still a bit premature to buy tickets to the nearest wormhole to visit the next galaxy or hunt dinosaurs!

My professional site at the Audio Engineering Society has been updated:

http://www.aes.org/aes/david-rountree

Join me as I return to Destiny Debbie’s radio program on Blog Talk Radio.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/Destinydebbie

Tune in Friday, June 19th from 6 to 8 P.M. Eastern time.

I have NO idea what we are going to talk about, but I am sure it will be good!!!

Tune into http://www.wrnjradio.com/streaming.php or in the Hackettstown Area, tune your radio to 1510 AM or 92.7 FM Tuesday, June 16th to hear me give a live reveal concerning the Gilbert Pa. case. The show starts at 3:10 P.M. Take care!