Paul LaViolette Is So Far Ahead Of His Time It's Scary!

Hi All,

Latest news on Mr. LaViolette's Superwave Theory. Seems mainstream science is finally starting to catch up with him. His dissertation on this was released to mostly deaf ears in 1983!

I believe this man will have a place in history within his own lifetime.

Cheers,

Blue Wolf

From nasa.gov: Previous XMM-Newton observations had identified black-hole winds blowing toward us, but could not determine whether the winds also blew in all directions. XMM-Newton had detected iron atoms, which are carried by the winds along with other matter, only directly in front of the black hole, where they block X-rays. The scientists combined higher-energy X-ray data from NuSTAR with observations from XMM-Newton. By doing this, they were able to find signatures of iron scattered from the sides, proving the winds emanate from the black hole not in a beam, but in a nearly spherical fashion.

etheric.com...-211413" target="_blank" class="postlink">Mr. LaViolette's Site

Sorry bad link. I will try again...

Mr. Laviolette's Site

originally posted by: Caroline13456
Hi All,

Latest news on Mr. LaViolette's Superwave Theory. Seems mainstream science is finally starting to catch up with him. His dissertation on this was released to mostly deaf ears in 1983!

The guy sounds like he's making up nonsense terms that mean nothing to me (from your corrected link...thanks for fixing it):

The high velocity wind is there because the core is active, and the core is active not because material is falling into it, but because of its intrinsic energy production through spontaneous energy creation, the phenomenon of genic energy production predicted by subquantum kinetics and proven by numerous a posteriori observations.

What the heck is "genic energy" and "subquantum kinetics"? Search those terms and they only seem to be found in reference to his stuff.

Maybe they are his version of the turbo encabulator? That's also way ahead of its time according to the promotional video.

Holy crap! This guy has basically proven that Black Holes don't 'eat' anything...they literally can't because the 'wind' coming out is so strong nothing could get inside!!!

quote:
" This finding challenges the conventional view that these supermassive black holes are cores energized by in falling material. Because this group acknowledges that with a wind as strong as they are seeing (1046 erg/second) it would be impossible for material to fall into the core to fuel its observed emission. "

That pretty much wipes out the theory of how Black Holes work. I don't know about his theory on where the energy is coming from...a ton more reading before I understand that.

Nice find!

link
youtu.be...

I'll have to watch this sometime...it's over 2 hours!!!

Interesting....and funny!

He says Black Holes don't even exist...there are just supermassive cores at the center of galaxies.

His Q&A is pretty funny...
etheric.com...

He tells people they are full of it and others to stop asking questions until they read his books! Love it!

a reply to: Arbitrageur

To the best of my extremely limited understanding genic energy is the act of spontaneous continuous creation at the sub quantum level. Hopefully this will shed some light on it for those more intelligent than I.



Paul LaViolette has created a non-orthodox theory of cosmo-genesis called subquantum kinetics.

From Subquantum Kinetics Predictions and their Subsequent Verification

Verification (1979 – 1986): Dr. LaViolette checks this photon redshifting prediction by comparing the tired-light non-expanding universe model and the expanding universe model (standard Freidman cosmology) to observational data on four different cosmology tests. He demonstrates that the tired-light model consistently makes a closer fit to observational data on all tests. His findings, which were published in the Astrophysical Journal (1986), confirm the subquantum kinetics tired light prediction and the notion that the universe is cosmologically stationary. These findings undermine a key support of the big bang theory. An update of this evidence is presented in Chapter 7 of Subquantum Kinetics.

a Greek physicist deemed LaViolette’s work on mass-luminosity of planets to be worthy of “two” Nobel prizes.

Although LaViolette’s prediction came out of a theory that was quite different from standard field theories, subquantum kinetics nonetheless has demonstrated a very good track record, having had 10 apriori predictions subsequently verified. Furthermore prior to the formulation of the maser signal experiment prediction, the genic energy prediction had already achieved success in accounting for planetary and stellar mass-luminosity data. An early test of the prediction was to determine whether planets such as Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune might be producing energy in their interiors. The answer was affirmative. Infrared telescope measurements made by various spacecraft showed that indeed they radiated substantial amounts of heat from their interiors. As a further test, LaViolette plotted the mass-luminosity coordinates for each of these planets along the mass-luminosity trend line for red dwarf stars. This relation, first discovered by Sir Arthur Eddington shows that red dwarf stars follow a logarithmic trend on a graph that plots a star’s luminosity against its mass, a stellar luminosity increasing approximately as the 2.75 power of stellar mass. No one had done this before perhaps because planets were assumed to be energetically dead masses in the process of cooling off and hence should not follow the trend line of active stellar bodies. To his surprise the mass-luminosity coordinates for the jovian planets lay along the lower main-sequence stellar mass-luminosity relation indicating that both planets and red dwarf stars were being powered by the same energy generation mechanism. This commonly shared energy source could not be fusion because the temperature and density in the interior of a planet is far too small to support thermonuclear fusion. Also the presumption that the body is cooling and releasing heat from an internal heat reservoir also fails because this energy source is insufficient to sustain the prodigious energy efflux emitted by red dwarf stars. Consequently, the conformance of the planets to the stellar M-L relation is unexplained by standard theories, leaving the genic energy concept to be the only viable explanation. In fact, the subquantum kinetics genic energy relation predicts the proper exponential rise of luminosity with mass. It was precisely by performing a model fit to this planetary-stellar M-L data that LaViolette was able to produce a numerical value for the rate of photon blueshifting in interplanetary space, a testable prediction, and thereby propose his spacecraft maser signal experiment. Higher mass stars, those lying along the upper stellar main sequence, would be powered primarily by nuclear fusion. The existence of two mass-luminosity trend lines, and upper 4 and lower branch, then becomes understandable. Stars belonging to the upper branch would be those in which nuclear fusion was adding its contribution. This genic energy M-L prediction achieved an added success after confirmation of its prediction that brown dwarfs would also conform to the same lower mass-luminosity relation as a low mass extension of the red dwarf trend line. Professor Panagiotis Pappas a physicist at the Technical Education Institute in Piraeus, Greece has publicly stated that “LaViolette deserves two Nobel prizes for his M-L relation finding alone.”

originally posted by: Caroline13456

a Greek physicist deemed LaViolette’s work on mass-luminosity of planets to be worthy of “two” Nobel prizes.

Oddly, "Dr Pappas" doesn't seem to have ever published any research papers, and TEI Piraeus doesn't show him as faculty. Now, there IS a Dr Panagiotis Pappas who is a professor at TEI Ionian, and he's a music prof.

Some important info if you start to believe his superwave theories....

When the next event might come...
starburstfound.org...

How to prepare for an event...
starburstfound.org...

a reply to: noeltrotsky

He has a great very dry sense of humor.

He is in very good company in his non belief in the existence of black holes. There is very good evidence now that they CAN'T exist!

Earlier this year Professor Stephen Hawking shocked physicists by saying 'there are no black holes'. In a paper published online, Professor Hawking instead argues there are 'grey holes' 'The absence of event horizons means that there are no black holes - in the sense of regimes from which light can't escape to infinity,' he says in the paper, called Information Preservation and Weather Forecasting For Black Holes. He says that the idea of an event horizon, from which light cannot escape, is flawed. He suggests that instead light rays attempting to rush away from the black hole’s core will be held as though stuck on a treadmill and that they can slowly shrink by spewing out radiation.

Daily Mail

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: Caroline13456

a Greek physicist deemed LaViolette’s work on mass-luminosity of planets to be worthy of “two” Nobel prizes.

Oddly, "Dr Pappas" doesn't seem to have ever published any research papers, and TEI Piraeus doesn't show him as faculty. Now, there IS a Dr Panagiotis Pappas who is a professor at TEI Ionian, and he's a music prof.

I found this physicist:
Pappas, Dr. Panagiotis T. (Easy Link: www.worldsci.org...)
Professor of Physics, Mathematician
www.worldsci.org...

ETA: Seems to of been well published.

Well it is passed my bedtime but this has me hooked, Top marks for starting the thread Caroline and for your contributions noeltrotsky.. Red Sun and Grey moon I have Read this somewhere in a dream thread.

Great thread Caroline thank you and an F&S for you finding this until now unknown gem.

originally posted by: Kukri

I found this physicist:
Pappas, Dr. Panagiotis T. (Easy Link: www.worldsci.org...)
Professor of Physics, Mathematician
www.worldsci.org...

ETA: Seems to of been well published.

Your first link is a 404, oddly enough.

The other link shows papers by a Panos Pappas. Sure it's the same guy?

At any rate, what he seems to write about are the sorts of things you'd expect from someone who'd agree with LaViolette - he thinks that potassium transforms to calcium inside of chickens, for instance, and he thinks there's a luminiferous aether.

Fubared this reply! I'll try it again

originally posted by: Caroline13456
He has a great very dry sense of humor.

He is in very good company in his non belief in the existence of black holes. There is very good evidence now that they CAN'T exist!


Earlier this year Professor Stephen Hawking shocked physicists by saying 'there are no black holes'. In a paper published online, Professor Hawking instead argues there are 'grey holes' 'The absence of event horizons means that there are no black holes - in the sense of regimes from which light can't escape to infinity,' he says in the paper, called Information Preservation and Weather Forecasting For Black Holes. He says that the idea of an event horizon, from which light cannot escape, is flawed. He suggests that instead light rays attempting to rush away from the black hole’s core will be held as though stuck on a treadmill and that they can slowly shrink by spewing out radiation.

Now that is easier to understand. Maybe Prof Hawkins is thinking of vortices, they can be long lasting but not perfect enough to last forever.

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: Kukri

I found this physicist:
Pappas, Dr. Panagiotis T. (Easy Link: www.worldsci.org...)
Professor of Physics, Mathematician
www.worldsci.org...

ETA: Seems to of been well published.

Your first link is a 404, oddly enough.

The other link shows papers by a Panos Pappas. Sure it's the same guy?

At any rate, what he seems to write about are the sorts of things you'd expect from someone who'd agree with LaViolette - he thinks that potassium transforms to calcium inside of chickens, for instance, and he thinks there's a luminiferous aether.

Panos is an abbreviation of Panogiatis. I doubt there are many physicists with that name.

Ok I went back and looked at the list of Abstracts he published and these are what's listed.
Abstracts Online:
1988 Thirty Six Nanoseconds Faster Than Light
1989 Non Relativistic Forces on Antennas
1983 The Original Amp?re Force and Biot-Savart and Lorentz Forces
1988 The Cardinal Law of Electrodynamics, the Principle of Conservation of Energy, and the Tesla Magnifying Effect
1990 Energy Generation Phenomenon: Lab to Star and Galaxy Generation
1991 Energy Creation in Electrical Sparks and Discharges: Theory and Direct Experimental Evidence
1999 The Lost Unified Theory
1999 K-Na-K Nuclear Transmutations Inside the Living Cell

Could you highlight or link me to the paper you referenced.

ETA: found the paper...
www.panospappas.gr...

Anyway i'm derailing the OP by trying to verify Dr. Pappas credibility which is pointless as he's a physicist and they are all batty so I'll leave it here

It looks to me that there is pretty good evidence to support increased cosmic 'wind' hitting Earth at certain times. The ice cores are recording increased activity. Laviolette says it is coming from the galactic center, NASA said it was likely supernova's. Now there seems to be increased acceptance that the center of our galaxy to pushing out a strong wind in all directions, not just a perpendicular ray as previously thought.

I still don't see the direct evidence that the galactic center is creating the periodic increased cosmic wind hitting Earth. I know there are limited options to cause that much increase in cosmic rays. Supernova events are pretty extreme so to match them whatever is causing the periodic increase needs to be massive. Laviolette is basically saying we see coronal mass ejections from suns, so if the galactic center is simply a much more massive 'sun' then it too can have mass ejections...and he is calling them superwaves.

I do like Laviolette's saying there are no such things as Black Holes. They always bothered me with all sorts of strange predictions. Given the regular periodic nature of the increased cosmic rays hitting Earth I tend to think one off Supernovas don't fit...and that is the current NASA explanation. So I'm inclined to think Laviolette may be right about the Galactic center being the periodic source of the cosmic ray increased found in the ice records.

Considering the measurements of energy radiation from planets and Suns of all sizes all fit along a nice curve is interesting, but when Laviolette jumps to 'sub quantum kinetics' I'm lost. Saying planets radiate their own energy gets difficult.

The guy clearly isn't a crank like an ATS poster is trying to pass him off as. Nice to see scientific types diving into deeper subjects that scientists fear to consider.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

Genic is relating to production or generation and sub quantum kinetics is motion below the quantum level. Maybe the person added the quantum descriptor to the process because some things closely related to space and atomic level physics can be either quantum or below quantum even though they are close neighbors within those sciences, if that makes any sense.

a reply to: Kukri

Hi, you are not derailing my thread by any means. Your contributions are much appreciated. Thanks for the link, I hadn't seen that before.

Carry on love!

Blue Wolf