T.O.E Certified, brings new ideas in physics reporting.

This release mentioned below concerns the discovery and retro-engineering of specialised theoretical physics, where there was an aim to make a physical approach possible of by the scientific mass as ‘unexplainable and unimitably' considered phenomena. Before, phenomena like immediate allergies, vortices and cars running on metastable OH with efficiency rates 'beyond 100%' could not yet be accounted for.

Other constitutions of nature like supposed unexplainable cases of homeopathy, controversial magnecules and perceived 'undeterminable' electromagnetic waves in general are also in this list. For some ideas on what also exists/existed outthere I gladly refer you to the videos and links below, the PES energy wiki and also to the nice website from rocket scientist Frank Germano. (mirror@energy library). The article conveys a new method for analysing and explaining a part of physics and it may seem unfamiliar at first, but further investigation will suggest and fulfill viability, validity and measurability.

Quantummechanics had given us little in specificly prescribed (non-local) revolutionary products, except for quantumencryption that is just computercode and quantumcomputers which don’t exist. Whereas my growing view, and that of the scientists working on the hereafter mentioned finished products, was that there were definitely new fields of thought possible; including but not limited to: the MIT Plasma Fuel Reformer, the Gliding Arc Fuel Reformer, most definitely the Water Distiller (guest appearance on The Colbert Report 03.24.2008), Toxic Decomposition, introducing a new look on hydrogen bonds, the Vortex Heat Changer, the WindHexe machine and last but not least the Joe Cell, all similar OxyHydrogen/HHO products and some other transmutations in general.
The latter explains in full detail their connection.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not Eureka! (I found it!) but rather, "hmm.... that's funny...."
- Isaac Asimov.

As a result of an article concerning energy and trusting Bruno's (zero-point measurer) wisdom/intuition I have contracted a weeks-long fight with the standardmodel of Physics. This did not provide to be very difficult since there are many, almost mainstream, models that conflict and differentiate within themselves and each other. As an admirer of theoretical physics and theoretical astrophysics I had, however, picked up things with self-study and in the scientific direction of the middle school. Everything seemed natural until during the lesson chemistry the uncertainty principle of Heisenberg entered. Either the speed, or the place. It seemed an important, yet abstract term. Core fission seemed promising at the time. I thought that Heisenberg=Bohr=Atom=atomsplicing=modern technology. I can imagine that I was not alone.

Now what proves to be, they were already splitting atoms before Bohr and Heisenberg(=quantum) wrote about it. (Curie a.o.) It was therefore in short a descriptive and not a prescriptive analysis. To analyse the uncertainty principle of Heisenberg I have been drawn to one of the senior and most wise of all, Einstein. His work is meanwhile just like quantummechanics experimentally proven valuable.

To unite the theories although, has been proven to be, after many years' research through 10 dimensions gone by, fruitless.
The problem for this is two-piece:

Quantummechanics is an approximation of reality, whereas Einstein’s General Relativity is a theory/law concerning reality. You cannot get from a descriptive analysis of reality to a prescriptive analysis.
There is an important methodological mistake that has been made at theorising by Einstein when he said: We cannot detect an aether in a gaseous form, therefore it probably does not exist. He was only partly right.

These two reservations do exist, therefore the standardphysics have not succeeded in forming a coherent connection between the theories. Physicists and mathematicians went of it that one had to start from quantumtheory (very good foreseeability) what led to exorbitant propositions (I have once attended a speech of Stephen Hawking concerning his branes (superstring dimensions) but there could not be tied an end to his physical properties for his mathematical characteristics. Now I know why.)

Of the string came the superstring (sexy!) with accompanying gravity and supergravity. Now that all sounds, cool, however I was in search of answers, damnit, and every theory finished again with problems along all sides. Einstein's last words were thus: “ Every Tom, Dick and Harry thinks he knows what a photon is, but they are mistaken.”

Einstein's view of 'quantum entanglement' as spooky action at a distance, along with the problems in QM with the measurement of "tachyons", "gravitational waves" and "dark matter", allowed me to think about the etymology of the word ' super ' in the previous brainteasers. This meant here: " brought in agreement with (other theories.)" Assuming that the development of a theory of the reality has stopped at the ‘General Relativity’ of Einstein, which was apparently the breaking point from a true deterministic viewpoint; I put my senses on a super-relativity theory. My search through Wikipedia was, although very educational, unfortunately at its end. With no conclusive information. Somewhat bewildered I tried Google. Yep, it stood there; under http://www.superrelativity.org/

All these still unexplained phenomena required some kind of electromagnetic theory. But where some current explanations were embedded in old aether theory, this could not be permitted by physicists and quantumphysicists around the world, more specific because of the Michelson-Morley experiment wich says some things about light, the observer thereof and subsequently does deny any moving aether, where light itself is not part of the electromechanics.

Mark Fiorentino, a top software engineer at IBM, parttime theoretical physicist, and allround awarded troubleshooter, in whose foot tracks i could step, had done where every other theorist until now had not succeeded in. His work is only since 2006 partly concluded. He had devoted more than 20 years of his life to the subject and they are currently laying the last hands on his all encompassing book, with a reference system. His model should finally unite Albert Einstein, Hendrik Antoon Lorentz and Nikola Tesla. And explain magnegases and OH- at the same time.

So this is therefore the coming scientific revolution where Bruno and others intuitively spoke about. It is clear that a better model of reality can give us new possibilities. And could reconcile new and old things with each other. Such as explaining: all atomic forces, all magnetic forces, cycles and perhaps eventually explaining even more than that;
therefore everyone who is interested in geometry or nature, it is not too complicated, get yourself to Super Relativity
I hope that you enjoyed my release from the eyes of a communication scientist;

---------------------------------------------------------

I would like to thank my scientist friends for their endurance in my struggle through the jungle that is Theoretical Physics, including G. Aerts, Physics Teacher and Master; S. Janssens, Chemistry ; and JC, Nuclear Engineer. This would not have been possible without all your constructive support. Lastly, I would like to thank Caroline Thompson, for her work on ‘loopholes’ in Bell’s Theorem Inequality Violations. May she rest in peace.

B.P.A.C

Communication Scientist

Go to top of page

For the follow-up article, go to Planes, Branes and Automobiles

Videos

Intro: The incredible garbage shrinking machine, introducing magnecules.

PESwiki intro

PES energy wiki intro ; Salt water news video.

Colbert's first vid of Dean Kamen's miracle (vapor compression distiller.)

Fox news video, made by Toxic in a Waste Reformer (tour part 3).
Coil, water as resistor (BNE), see Mobile Bubbler

fuel processor introduction from inventor, , part 2, .

(W/Pd rods in ²H => ³H, heavy metals ; Laudin website) (L.E.N.R. with excess energy.)

WindHexe Machine, Alsetalokin’s motor, (DC) , Sky news video (AU.)


Do-it-yourself 'Mobile Bubbler':

Joe Cell:

Making a basic from spare parts: 0$

(5D water electrolyser)

Step-by-step video instructions (4 x 5min + bloopers):

, DIY 2, DIY 3, DIY 4, Dont-do-it-yourself 5, Dont-DIY final cut

Seen it bubble by itself?
Good! Now read all about the lightning in your engine.

Rexresearch on the Joe Cell
Frank Germano on the Joe Cell
Joecelldevices.com , Yahoo Tech Group

Don't want to assemble? Try an auction site like e-bay.

Go to top of page


Learn-it-yourself:

http://www.waterfuelconverters.com/ (consortium to determine brownsgas)
http://www.brownsgas.com/ (company)
http://www.magnegas.com/ (plasma arc tech)
Brownsgas, Oxyhydrogen (approximations)
Advanced theory of the HHO bond; electrostatic scalar field (SR)
http://www.thejoecell.com (lightning in your engine)
Planes, Branes and Automobiles (truth about free energy)

Answers.com on cold fusion, Navy revives cold fusion hopes
Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (Transmutations)
Impossible Tornado (Works on principles beyond current physics)
Rexresearch on the Joe Cell (extensive)
Process Physics (process system paradigm)
Tesla's Dynamic Theory of Gravity (see SR)
Tesla Dictionary of advanced Research Terminology (still unverified)
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Main_Page (energy wiki)
http://www.frank.germano.com, mirror (Tesla & Schauberger)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_test_loopholes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity
Dialog about Objections against the Theory of Relativity (A. Einstein)
Einstein's "Aether and the Theory of Relativity" (+ commentary)
The undisovered error (M.M. Fiorentino)
Super Relativity.org, partial Encyclopedia article

Go to top of page

Disclaimer: This is the theoretical and practical field as it stands. It is conclusive, in the theoretical sense, for it combines all peer-reviewed knowledge, as summarized on the Internet's vast encyclopedia Wikipedia. As such it has encyclopedic value. It is unconclusive, in the practical sense, for the list of still unexplained machinery may be much longer. It does not prove zero-point, as zero-point is still only a quantized description. I did not just stumble on the forementioned website. I did not follow a link. These people have nothing to do with the theory. Worse than that, most, if not all, don’t even know how it does work exactly.
I went through a thought experiment. A habit of which I can surely recommend.

Bibliography

...

(verified shortlist, to be continued)

Go to top of page

For 'quantifiable zero-point' Purposes Only (quantum foam, longitudinal wave; only , 4D, +10D):

(extensive verified list will not be made available soon because of redundancy issues)

For other, though incomplete and perhaps faulty, theories go to:

http://www.cheniere.org/
http://www.digibio.com/
BBC controversy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_therapy
http://www.thewaterengine.com/
http://www.byronnewenergy.com/

Other, unverified, links

Go to top of page

1.7 years passed by with Super Relativity unfalsified. The original TOE since 2006;

Is Heisenberg right?
Yes. You cannot measure energy and time, at the same time, in a 4-dimensional world.
-7th April, 2008

For the current status on SR theory, please go to Letters with Mr. Fiorentino… , part two

For more information on physics and SR machinery please visit the Superrelativity Wiki (new)

physcom.awardspace.com