Hubble's New "Runaway Planet":
A Unique Opportunity for Testing
the Exploding Planet Hypothesis and
... Hyperdimensional Physics
Part II

Since, in three dimensions, all energy eventually "degrades" to random motions -- via Kelvin and Gibb's 19th Century Laws of Thermodynamics (it's called "increasing entropy") -- "stress energy" of the aether (vacuum) released inside a material object, even if it initially appears in a coherent form -- driving, for instance, the anomalous (1400 mile-per-hour!), planet-girdling winds of distant Neptune's "jet streams" -- will eventually degrade to simple, random heat ... ultimately radiated away as "excess infrared emissions" into space. It's the initial, astrophysical conditions under which such "Maxwellian space potentials" can be released inside a planet (or a star ...), that have been the central focus of our efforts for ten years --

To create a predictive, mathematical "hyperdimensional model" of such physics.

The entire question comes down to--

"What set of known spatial conditions will slowly, predictably, release the potential strains of 4-space into 3-space' ... inside a massive world ... so that when this energy inevitably degrades to heat, its radiative signature identifies the original hyperdimensional' source?"

Fortunately, we are surrounded by almost half a dozen examples close at hand: the giant, "anomalously radiating" planets of this solar system (and some major moons). Over the past decade, as we have attempted to understand their anomalous IR radiation, one thing has become clear -- to a first order, the "infrared excesses" of the giant planets all seem to correlate very nicely with one parameter each has in common -- regardless of their individual masses, elemental compositions, or distance from the Sun:

Their total system "angular momentum."

The mass of a body and the rate at which it spins, in classical physics, determines an object's "angular momentum." In our Hyperdimensional Model, its a bit more complicated -- because objects apparently separated by distance in this (3-space) dimension are in fact connected in a "higher" (4-space) dimension; so, in the HD model, one also adds in the orbital momentum of an object's gravitationally-tethered satellites -- moons in the case of planets; planets, in the case of the Sun, or companion stars in the case of other stars.

When one graphs the total angular momentum of a set of objects -- such as the radiating outer planets of this solar system (plus Earth and Sun) -- against the total amount of internal energy each object radiates to space, the results are striking:

The more total system angular momentum a planet (or any celestial body) possesses (as defined above -- object plus satellites), the greater its intrinsic "brightness," i.e. the more "anomalous energy" it apparently is capable of "generating."

And, as can be seen from this key diagram, this striking linear dependence now seems to hold across a range of luminosity and momentum totaling almost three orders of magnitude ... almost 1000/1!

Especially noteworthy, the Earth (not "a collapsing gas giant," by any stretch of the imagination) also seems to fit precisely this empirical energy relationship: when the angular momentum of the Moon is added to the "spin momentum" of its parent planet, the resulting correlation with measurements derived from internal "heat budget" studies of the Earth are perfectly fitted to this solar-system-wide empirical relationship -- even though the Earth's internal energy is supposedly derived from "radioactive sources."

And, as can be seen from the accompanying historical comparison, this striking solar system linear relationship is actually more tightly constrained (even at this early stage) than the original Hubble "redshift data" supporting the Big Bang!


This discovery contains major implications, not only for past geophysics and terrestrial evolution ... but for future geological and climatological events -- "Earth changes," as some have termed them. These may be driven, not by rising solar interactions or by-products of terrestrial civilization (accumulating "greenhouse gases" from burning fossil fuels), but by this same "hyperdimensional physics." If so, then learning a lot more about the mechanisms of this physics -- and quickly! -- is a critical step toward intervening and eventually controlling our future well-being, if not our destiny, on (and off!) this planet ...

For the "Hyperdimensional Physics" model, this simple but powerful relationship now seems to be the equivalent of Relativity's E=MC2 : a celestial object's total internal luminosity seems dependent upon only one physical parameter:

L=mr2 = total system angular momentum (object, plus all satellites)


There is a well-known "rule of thumb" in science, perhaps best expressed by a late Noble Laureate, physicist Richard Feynman:

"You can recognize truth by its beauty and simplicity. When you get it right, it is obvious that it is right -- at least if you have any experience -- because usually what happens is that more comes out than goes in ... The inexperienced, the crackpots, and people like that, make guesses that are simple, but you can immediately see that they are wrong, so that does not count. Others, the inexperienced students, make guesses that are very complicated, and it sort of looks as if it is all right, but I know it is not true because the truth always turns out to be simpler that you thought ..."

This startling relationship -- our discovery of the simple dependence of an object's internal luminosity on its total system angular momentum -- has that "feel" about it; it is simple ... it is elegant ... in fact--

It could even be true.

But, as can be seen from examining the luminosity/angular momentum diagram again, there also appears to be one glaring exception to this otherwise strikingly linear relationship:

The Sun itself.

Independent research, involving over 30 years of attempted confirmation of the Sun's basic energy source -- in the form of solar/terrestrial observations of tiny atomic particles called "neutrinos," supposedly coming from the center of the Sun -- have left laboratory physicists and astrophysicists with a major astronomical enigma:

The Sun is not emitting anything like the number of neutrinos required by the "Standard Solar Model" for its observed energy emission; if its energy is due to "thermo-nuclear reactions" (as the Standard Model demands), then the observed "neutrino deficit" is upwards of 60%: even more remarkable, certain kinds of primary neutrinos (calculated as required to explain the bulk of the solar interior's fusion reactions, based on laboratory measurements) turn out to be simply missing altogether!

So -- what really fuels the Sun?

The answer to the Sun's apparent violation of the Standard Solar Model -- ironically, is contained in its striking "violation" of our key angular momentum/luminosity diagram:


In the Hyperdimensional Model, the Sun's primary energy source -- like the planets' -- must be driven by its total angular momentum -- its own "spin momentum," plus the total angular momentum of the planetary masses orbiting around it. Any standard astronomical text reveals that, though the Sun contains more than 98% of the mass of the solar system, it contains less than 2% of its total angular momentum. The rest is in the planets. Thus, in adding up their total contribution to the Sun's angular momentum budget -- if the HD model is correct -- we should see the Sun following the same line on the graph that the planets, from Earth to Neptune, do.

It doesn't.

The obvious answer to this dilemma is that the HD model is simply wrong.

The less obvious is that we're missing something ...

Like ... additional planets (above)!

By adding another big planet (or a couple of smaller ones) beyond Pluto (several hundred times the Earth's distance from the Sun -- below), we can move the Sun's total angular momentum to the right on the graph, until it almost intersects the line (allowing for a percentage, about 30%, of internal energy expected from genuine thermonuclear reactions ...). This creates the specific "HD prediction" that "the current textbook tally of the Sun's angular momentum is deficient because ..."


We haven't discovered all the remaining members of the solar system yet!

As a dividend, this promptly presents us with our first key test of the Hyperdimensional Model:

1) Find those planets!

The second test of the Hyperdimensional Model is that, unlike other efforts to explain anomalous planetary energy emissions via continued "planetary collapse," or "stored primordial heat," the hyperdimensional approach specifically predicts one radical, definitive observational difference from all other existing explanations--

2) HD energy generation in both planets and stars should be -- must be -- variable.

This is simply implicit in the mechanism which generates the hyperdimensional energy in the first place: ever changing hyperspatial geometry.


If the ultimate source of planetary (or stellar) energy is this "vorticular (rotating) spatial stress between dimensions" (ala Maxwell), then the constantly changing pattern (both gravitationally and dimensionally) of interacting satellites in orbit around a major planet/star must modulate that stress pattern as a constantly changing, geometrically twisted "aether" (ala Whittaker's amplifications of Maxwell). In our Hyperdimensional Model, it is this "constantly changing hyperspatial geometry" that is capable (via resonant rotations with the masses in question -- either as spin, or circular orbital motions) of extracting energy from this underlying "rotating, vorticular aether" ... and then releasing it inside material objects.

Initially, this "excess energy" can appear in many different forms -- high-speed winds, unusual electrical activity, even enhanced nuclear reactions -- but, ultimately, it must all degrade to simple "excess heat." Because of the basic physical requirement for resonance in effectively coupling a planet (or a star's) "rotating 3-D mass to the underlying 4-D aether rotation," this excess energy generation must also, inevitably, vary with time -- as the changing orbital geometry of the "satellites" interacts with the spinning primary (and the underlying, "vorticular aether"...) in and out-of-phase.

For these reasons, as stated earlier, time-variability of this continuing energy exchange must be a central hallmark of this entire "HD process."

[Incidentally, understanding this basic "hyperdimensional transfer mechanism," in terms of Maxwell's original quaternions (that describe "a rotating, vorticular, four-dimensional sponge-like aether"), immediately lends itself to creating a "Hyperdimensional Technology" based on this same mechanism.

The fundamental "violations" of current physics exhibited by so-called "free energy" machines -- from the explicitly-rotating "N-machine" to the initially frustrating time-variable aspects of "electro-chemical cold fusion"-- are now elegantly explained by appropriate application of Maxwell's original ideas.

Even more extraordinary: the recent startling demonstration, broadcast nationwide on ABC's "Good Morning America" last year, of a "physically impossible" major reduction -- in a few minutes! -- of long-lived radioactive Uranium isotopes. Normally, such processes require billions of years to accomplish. This too is now elegantly explained by the Hyperdimensional Model-- As -- an "induced hyperspatial stress," created by the machine ... the same stress that initially (in the Model) induces "unstable isotopes" in the first place. By technologically enhancing such vacuum stress within these nuclei, via a retuning of Maxwell's "scalar potentials," the normal radioactive breakdown process is accelerated -- literally billions of times ...


The implications for an entire "rapid, radioactive nuclear waste reduction technology" -- accomplishing in hours what would normally require aeons -- is merely one immediate, desperately needed world-wide application of such "Hyperdimensional Technologies."]


In our own planetary system, all the "giant" planets possess a retinue of at least a dozen satellites: one or two major ones (approximating the size of the planet Mercury) ... with several others ranging down below the diameter and mass of our own Moon ... in addition to a host of smaller objects; because of the "lever effect" in the angular momentum calculations, even a small satellite orbiting far away (or at a steep angle to the planet's plane of rotation) can exert a disproportional effect on the "total angular momentum" equation -- just look at Pluto and the Sun.

Even now, Jupiter's four major satellites (which have collective masses approximately 1/10,000th of Jupiter itself), during the course of their complex orbital interactions, are historically known to cause time-altered behavior in a variety of well-known Jovian phenomena--

Including -- "anomalous" latitude and longitude motions of the Great Red Spot itself.

As we presented at the U.N. in 1992, the Great Red Spot -- a mysterious vortex located for over 300 years at that "infamous" 19.5 degrees S. Latitude, via the circumscribed tetrahedral geometry of the equally infamous "27 line problem" -- is the classic "hyperdimensional signature" of HD physics operating within Jupiter.

The existence of decades of recorded "anomalous motions" of this Spot, neatly synchronized with the highly predictable motions of Jupiter's own moons, are clearly NOT the result of conventional "gravitational" or "tidal" interactions -- in view of the relatively insignificant masses of the moons compared to Jupiter itself; but, following Maxwell and Whittaker, the hyperdimensional effects of these same moons -- via the long "lever" of angular momentum on the constantly changing, vorticular scalar stress potentials inside Jupiter -- that is a very different story ...

So, Hyperdimensional Test number three:

3) Look for small, short-term amplitude-variations in the infrared emission levels of all the giant planets ... synchronized (as are the still-mysterious motions of the GRS on Jupiter) with the orbital motions and conjunctions of their moons.

All NASA models for the "anomalous energy emissions" of these planets have assumed a steady output; the "snapshot" values derived from the mere few hours of Voyager fly-bys in the 1980's are now firmly listed in astronomy texts as new "planetary constants"; the reason: the emissions are viewed by NASA as either "primordial heat," stored across the aeons; energy release from internal long-term radioactive processes; or literal, slight settling of portions of the entire planet, still releasing gravitational potential energy ... all processes that will not change perceptibly even in thousands of years!

Confirmed short-term variations in the current planetary IR outputs, of "a few hours" (or even a few days) duration -- and synchronized with the orbital periods of the planets' satellites themselves -- would thus be stunning evidence that all the "mainstream" explanations are in trouble ... and that the Hyperdimensional Model deserves much closer scrutiny ...

In this same vein: unlike all "conventional NASA explanations," in a phenomenon akin to "hyperdimensional astrology," the HD model also specifically predicts significantly larger, long-term variability in these major planetary IR outputs ... of several years duration. These (like the shorter variations triggered by the changing geometry between the satellites) should be caused by the constantly changing hyperdimensional (spatial stress) interactions between the major planets themselves ... as they continually change their geometry relative to one another, each orbiting the Sun with a different relative velocity.


These changing interactive stresses in the "boundary between hyperspace and real' space" (in the Hyperdimensional Model) now also seem to be the answer to the mysterious "storms" that, from time to time, have suddenly appeared in the atmospheres of several of the outer planets. The virtual "disappearance," in the late 80's, of Jupiter's Great Red Spot is one remarkable example; Saturn's abrupt production of a major planetary "event," photographed by the Hubble Space Telescope in 1994 as a brilliant cloud erupting at 19.5 degrees N. (where else?!), is yet another.

Since the prevailing NASA view is that these planets' "excess" IR output must be constant over time, no one has bothered to look for any further correlations -- between a rising or falling internal energy emission ... and the (now, historically well-documented) semi-periodic eruptions of such "storms."

They should.

Click for Part III


[Acknowledgments: the author wishes to extend deep appreciation to Lt. Col. T.E. Bearden (U.S. Army, Ret.) for his many years of historical research and technical analysis, which have made key aspects of this proposal possible; to Marianne Shenefield for her long collaboration in exploring practical applications of James Clerk Maxwell's pioneering interest in "hyperdimensional consciousness"; and to Rhonda Eklund -- for rediscovering Maxwell's original "hyperdimensional poetry."]