Wednesday, January 17, 2018

A Likely Convergence between the Quantum Hologram Theory of Consciousness and Post-Quantum Mechanics (work in progress)

A Likely Convergence between the Quantum Hologram Theory of Consciousness and Post-Quantum Mechanics (work in progress)
Giorgio Piacenza

Conceptually-speaking, there are parallels between the Quantum Hologram Theory of Consciousness (QHTC) and Post-Quantum Mechanics (PQM). I think it is imperative to explore both theories and how they might reinforce each other to advance a more comprehensive scientific theory capable of dealing with non-local, self-organizing, intelligent, conscious phenomena.

Non-local, two-way, information signaling for effective communication is not allowed in orthodox quantum mechanics due to the unitary, linear, statistical evolution of the wave function. Bell’s Theorem shows that quantum reality must be non-local, but it shows this under an orthodox interpretation of Quantum Mechanics without back action, non-linearity. This is why Bell’s Theorem applies against the non-random, deterministic, Bohmian interpretation partly based on hidden non-observable, but real objects (“be-ables” or “beables” as called by John Bell) in relation to the orthodox evolution of the wave function.  Not probability waves but real waves and potential waves are said to move real particles and the “beables” are non-observable but real. However, the emphasis is on the waves guiding the particles and little feedback is stressed for the latter to the former. Pilot wave theory´s hidden variables that are not encoded in the original wave function is difficult to intuitively accept and most physicists have preferred the – also intuitively difficult to accept - strangeness of sudden collapse and of probability waves associated with the Copenhagen Interpretation or the strangeness of the idea of complete alternative real universes appearing everytime there is a measurement.

But the introduction of back reaction between classic particles and their pilot waves in Bohmian mechanics and also of retrocausality in closed, time-like curves allows for a non-linear evolution of the wave function and for a more practical quantum mechanical process in which events like non-local, two-way, classical information signaling through traversable wormholes.
Interestingly, this would also be compatible with the universe-as-a-hologram idea that ER = EPR (originally conceptualized in relation to the AdS/CFT duality that was thought as a way to solve the black hole information loss paradox).  It allows information from 3D physical objects to be stored or represented in a 2D surface area. This is an interface that according to Chris Fields and Donald Hoffman is an imaginary boundary (as in black holes) which allows for classical information interactions to be defined. And, in this picture, entanglement would be “the condition of interacting with the world through an imaginary interface on which classical information appears.” Source:

Ultimately (especially in Don Hoffman’s theory) we would have a consciousness monism or consciousness panpsychism and consciousness would interact with its own symbolic representations acquiring classical information, experiencing itself distinct from other consciousnesses (or “conscious agents”) and from “objects” (which would also be “conscious agents”). But the interaction could be thought of as an “interface.” And this “interface” may connect but also transcend spacetime since Hoffman´s theory is already mathematically connecting with spacetime conformal super symmetry, Dirac spinors and Penrose twistors which are models that relate with various quantum-relativistic physics proposals. Hoffman also prefers new directions in physics which are outside of spacetime and show deeper symmetries in nature facilitating complex calculations (like Nima Arkani Hamed’s work on the Amplituhedron). Source: and

In Hoffman’s theory physical objects and brain components in spacetime would have no actual causal powers but perhaps (by considering them as symbolic representations of consciousness) they can still be modeled as if they did (in the PQM) as interacting through the resonant convergence of causal and retrocausal information involving beables and pilots waves and (in the QHTC) as quantum offer waves meeting PCAR “virtual” waves.

Interestingly (and compatible with the concept of a holographic matrix), Hoffman basically states that we are living in a “data structure” but not in ultimately real spacetime and that our “error correcting code” produces the illusion of an objective 3D world. Thus, the ultimate source would be consciousness itself engaged/playing with itself and (in agreement with the QHTC) coding and decoding his own created matrix. Source:

I like this approach (at least in partial agreement with QHTC) because I’m not satisfied with suggestions by some QHTC and PQM authors that, for consciousness to exist, other formal, decodable, quantifiable processes must exist. Instead, I’m more of the view that consciousness uses vehicles of expression and experience resonant with different levels of reality both ultimately of its own making (as in the concept of Hylic Pluralism, Vedanta, Theosophy, Mahayana-Tantric and other non-dual, experiential, metaphysical systems generally converging in this aspect).

I suppose that, in terms of some Indian metaphysics, the “interface” would be part of an “akasha” as a sort of transducer between gross, physical reality and a subtle, mind-dominated, non-physical reality.  I suppose that (in terms of the QHTC) this “interface” is situated in the “handshake” between the emitted quantum information waves and the PCAR decoder of the waves as much as (in terms of the PQM) it is situated between the causal and retrocausal relation involving classical beables and “local” pilot waves. It may be “imaginary” not only because of the square root of minus 1 is used in the quantum wave function but because it allows observers with consciousness or subjectivities to obtain classical information (perform a measurement) about their world while simultaneously including retrocausality to do this.


The original pilot wave theory referred to global hidden variables. It is affirmed that Von Neuman and, later, John Bell’s Theorem invalidated once and for all the possibility of hidden variables but they referred to a local, hidden variables. In David Bohm’s proposal, the wave function possesses holistic, non-local, global information of the position and momentum of every particle. Furthermore, the entire wave function is instantaneously modified when the particles are affected.

John Bell was only able to show that hidden variables exclusively obeying retarded, past-to-future causality contradicted the statistical predictions of orthodox quantum theory. He felt that his own approach to retrocausality as a solution against (spatial) non-locality would contradict free will.  
But, beside retrocausality as an explanation for Bell’s Theorem’s non-locality, retrocausality can also be an “explanation of the results of 'weak measurements' by Aharonov, Vaidman and others.”  

The introduction of retrocausality may also render “no-go,” physically impossible states, possible and invalidate no-go theorem-based explanations that require epistemic solutions over ontological ones. Source:

It is said that Bohm’s Pilot Wave, Hidden Variable theory is not relativistic like Quantum Field Theory is, but the introduction of retrocausality relates Pilot Wave Theory with relativity.

Perhaps Bell’s mistake was to think only about one possible future and one possible past determining what happens to a quantum system instead of thinking about many possible futures and – when the past is unknown – many possible pasts.

A serious consideration of the need to include retrocausality – however counter-intuitive it might seem – has been entertained by renowned physicists like John A. Wheeler, Richard Feynman, Oscar Klein and William Gordon (of the relativistic-invariant Klein-Gordon Equation); by Jeff Tollaksen, John Cramer (the Transactional Interpretation of QM) and by mathematicians like Luigi Fantappie who since the 1940’s considered the necessary role of retrocausality in “syntropic” living processes.

However, accepting retrocausality not only requires demonstrable arguments but the capacity to include in our conscious awareness an intuition capable of transcending a time-forward only perception of reality. Otherwise, the inclusion of retrocausality (which among its effects allows for traversable wormholes, for conscious quantum computing, real-time, telepathic communication and other phenomena sometimes associated with psi phenomena and with reported events described by experiencers of contact with technologically advanced non-human intelligent beings) would have already become an important part of standard quantum physics at least since the 1920’s when (as Ulisse di Corpo explains in “The Conflict between Entropy and Syntropy: The Vital Needs Model”):

“In special relativity the energy-momentum relation relates the energy of an object (E) with its momentum (p), and mass (m), where c is the speed of light: E2 = p2 c2 + m2 c4
This equation has a dual energy solution: one positive +E, which moves forward in time, and one negative −E, which moves backward in time. If the momentum is zero then the equation simplifies into the famous energy-mass relation: E = mc2
Oscar Klein and William Gordon in order to generalize the Schrödinger wave equation into a relativistic invariant equation, had to insert the full energy-momentum relation, arriving at a dual wave solution which characterizes the D'Alambert operator: retarded potentials which propagate from the past to the future (+E) and anticipated potentials which propagate backward, from the future to the past (−E).” Source:

Or perhaps the fundamental reconciling role of retrocausality in physics would have been recognized when in the 1950’s French physicist Olivier Costa de Beauregard basically showed that a realistic interpretation of Quantum Mechanics was possible with its introduction… that the alternative to “spooky” action-at-a-distance was retrocausality as shown in Huw Price and Ken Wharton’s “Taming the Quantum Spooks: Reconciling Einstein with Quantum Mechanics Require the Notion that Cause always Precedes Effect” Source:

“Costa de Beauregard pointed out that Alice could affect Bob’s particle without action-at-a-distance, if the influence followed an indirect, zigzag path through space and time, via the point in the past where the two particles intersect. But there are no zigzags like that in standard quantum mechanics, so if we put them in we are actually agreeing with Einstein that the theory is incomplete.
Later, when Bell’s work appeared, Costa de Beauregard recognised the deeper significance of the zigzag: it offers a potential reconciliation between Bell and Einstein. Bell’s argument depends on the assumption that the choice of measurement settings at the two sides of the experiment is independent of any earlier properties, or ‘hidden variables’, of the particles. This assumption is called statistical independence, but the Parisian zigzag gives us a reason to reject it.”

Furthermore, as explained in the abstract for “Disentangling the Quantum World” Huw Price and Ken Wharton elucidate that “Correlations related to quantum entanglement have convinced many physicists that there must be some at-a-distance connection between separated events, at the quantum level. In the late 1940s, however, O. Costa de Beauregard proposed that such correlations can be explained without action at a distance, so long as the influence takes a zigzag path, via the intersecting past lightcones of the events in question. Costa de Beauregard's proposal is related to what has come to be called the retrocausal loophole in Bell's Theorem, but -- like that loophole -- it receives little attention, and remains poorly understood. Here we propose a new way to explain and motivate the idea. We exploit some simple symmetries to show how Costa de Beauregard's zigzag needs to work, to explain the correlations at the core of Bell's Theorem. As a bonus, the explanation shows how entanglement might be a much simpler matter than the orthodox view assumes -- not a puzzling feature of quantum reality itself, but an entirely unpuzzling feature of our knowledge of reality, once zigzags are in play.” Source:

Renowned experimental physicist and theoretician Yakir Aharonov also basically showed (both theoretically and experimentally) that retrocausality is possible.  In the abstract to his article (with Eliahu Cohen and Tomer Shushi) “Accommodating Retrocausality with Free Will” he writes:

Retrocausal models of quantum mechanics add further weight to the conflict between causality and the possible existence of free will. We analyze a simple closed causal loop ensuing from the interaction between two systems with opposing thermodynamic time arrows, such that each system can forecast future events for the other. The loop is avoided by the fact that the choice to abort an event thus forecasted leads to the destruction of the forecaster's past. Physical law therefore enables prophecy of future events only as long as this prophecy is not revealed to a free agent who can otherwise render it false. This resolution is demonstrated on an earlier finding derived from the two-state vector formalism, where a weak measurement's outcome anticipates a future choice, yet this anticipation becomes apparent only after the choice has been actually made. To quantify this assertion, weak information is described in terms of Fisher information. We conclude that an already existing future does not exclude free will nor invoke causal paradoxes. On the quantum level, particles can be thought of as weakly interacting according to their past and future states, but causality remains intact as long as the future is masked by quantum indeterminism.  Quanta 2016; 5: 53–60.

 Lev Vaidman and Yakir Aharonov found that a weak vertical magnetic field is equivalent not to a classical measurement but to a quantum measurement. Furthermore, post-selected weak measurements experiments conducted by Lev Vaidman, Aephraim Steinberg, Yakir Aharonov and others show that negative probabilities and retrocausality leading to a deterministic, yet, non-linear, free-will-available interpretation of the wave function must be seriously considered. With post-selected weak measurements, the disturbances introduced into a quantum system are kept to a minimum but – naturally - precision is lost.

The use of large, identically prepared quantum systems while statistically averaging the results counteracts the loss of precision. With these post-selection experiments, the experimenter can only work with an ensemble of final states and retroactively recover how these influenced the outcome by interacting with initial states. This allows for a time-symmetric quantum interpretation as in the two-state vector formalism of quantum mechanics (TSVF) originating in the proposals of Aharonov, Bergmann, and Lebowitz (also known as the “ABL Proposal”).

In “The Two-State Vector Formalism: An Updated Review” Aharonov and Vaidman write:

“A system at a given time t is described completely by a two-state vector Φ| |Ψ
 which consists of a quantum state |

 defined by the results of measurements performed on the system in the past relative to the time t and of a backward evolving quantum state
| defined by the results of measurements performed on this system after the time t. Again, the status of the two-state vector might be interpreted in different ways, but a noncontroversial fact is that it yields maximal information about how this system can affect other systems (in particular, measuring devices) interacting with it at time t.” Source:

Perhaps Einstein’s realistic intuition was significantly correct after all if non-local communication is possible under realistic terms. The classical concept of spatial causality would endure while being non-local (due to the meeting of causality and retrocausality) in time. Thus, locality would not longer be synonymous with “physical objectivity” (under a form of determinism that allows choice/free will and, computationally, P=NP in closed, timelike loops that overcome algorithmic limitations).
PQM would overcome the no-signaling theorem in the sense that real physical entities would be able to interact exchanging information in a classical way.

Key Concepts in Jack Sarfatti’s abstract for his article “Bohm Pilot Wave Post-Quantum Theory”  

“Valentini has shown that the Born probability rule and its consequent no entanglement signaling restriction is not fundamental.”
“Sutherland has shown how Yakir Aharonov’s retrocausal “weak measurement” technique applies in the Lagrangian framework to give a relativistically covariant post-quantum theory in which there is two-way action-reaction between the qubit pilot waves and their beables (e.g. classical particles and classical local gauge fields) without the need for configuration space for many-particle entanglement.”
“The post-quantum backreaction corresponds to computation around closed timelike curves in which P = NP with profound implications for quantum cryptography code breaking.”
“We expect Prigogine pumped open dissipative structures with Frohlich macro-quantum coherence to be post-quantum systems.”
“It’s a great calculational advantage of Sutherland’s local real retrocausal weak measurement formalism that we can use LOCAL field equations without second-quantization even when the beables are entangled.”

Discussion 1
PQM would refer to a deeper, more inclusive level of nature interpreted by a more comprehensive quantum theory which would operate in a relativistically invariant, realistic (rather than statistical) manner, building upon Dr. David Bohm’s interpretation of quantum mechanics. Unlike the orthodox de Broglie-Bohm-Hiley interpretation, it would still be non-local and compatible with the restrictions imposed by Bell’s Theorem.  It is now being called “Post Quantum Mechanics,” is consistent with weak measurement experiments in which retrocausality is involved, has been proposed by Dr. Jack Sarfatti for several years and recently became mathematical consistent with the inclusion of Dr. Roderick Sutherland’s formalism.

The QHTC relies upon an orthodox Copenhagen, statistical interpretation of the wave function and – in its formalism - dismisses the need for higher dimensions of spacetime. It is “realistic” in that it operates on 3 dimensions of space and 1 dimension of time.   Similarly, PQM’s formalism doesn’t require the use of a higher dimensional spacetime.

Moreover, (as in General Relativity in which mass-energy has a back action on spacetime), there is a form of back action in the PQM theory.  “Backreaction” between particles and pilot waves is paramount in PQM and, similarly, in the QHTC, the concept of RESONANCE is paramount. For example, regarding human (and animal) conscious experience of reality, specific brain components (perhaps involving microtubules) are postulated to generate a phase conjugate adaptive resonant (PCAR) wave representation of the quantum information waves emitted by physical objects. The whole body is also part of the resonance. However, resonance requires feedback or back action and retrocausality, may be required.

I suggest that the information waves in the QHTC would be of a nature akin or identical to the Pilot Waves of the Quantum Potential in David Bohm’s framework. In the former case, the dimensional framework for causal energy effects would be “realistic” in the sense of remaining within 3 dimensions of space and 1 dimension of time. In the latter case, the framework would be “realistic” in the sense that a real configuration of the wave function is stressed even in the absence of an observer.
If we extend resonant, coding-decoding, quantum wave, non-local, holographic, information communication to a deeper quantum-realistic level comprising all objects in the universe (a level in which real objects can detect, decode, observe,  measure and thus “converse” with each other), the “measurement problem” in the non-realistic, Copenhagen Interpretation “collapse of the (probability) wave function” might be solved. 

Under the hypothesis of “quantum equilibrium” Bohmian mechanics reasonably replaces the “collapse (of probabilities)” by the interaction between real quantum particles and the particle configuration of a real measuring object. The particles are “real” and the theory is deterministic. The interphase seems to be in the Pilot Waves and the non-local wave function. This may be akin to a non-local, holographic conversation between objects through PCAR coding and decoding but, for the Bohmian interpretation to be feasible, it would have to be extended into Post-Quantum Mechanics.
In the QHTC theory it is said that a meeting of an object and its decoded information waves would generate a resonant standing wave pattern, as if two hands were shaking. The zero-point field from quantum field theory is considered necessary for the existence of the information waves. Source:

In the PQM theory, the back reaction between pilot waves and its particles/beables would also produce a standing wave. But – unlike the situation in Bohmian Mechanics - the pilot waves would not depend on the particles/ beables.

I suggest that the PCAR in the QHTC and the back reaction in PQM may be different aspects of a single phenomenon.  

In the QHTC real physical objects are non-locally connected through a wave coding-decoding resonance in which the PCAR is compatible with a holographic mathematical description and which (through the Copenhagen interpretation extended to the observer) involves consciousness.  In PQM theory we can also think of the non-local connection between beables/particles (objects) and pilot waves involving back action or feedback between the former and the latter as a coding-decoding, non-local, resonant, standing wave communication.  

Discussion 2
The experience of subjective meaningfulness that we have is not explained well by the QHTC as it stand snow because it is partially based on the orthodox quantum theory and orthodox evolution of the wave function equation but if we introduce nonlinearity in the equation (and other factors related to the PQM), then the possibility of choice and, therefore, quite likely, of subjective meaningfulness would be included.

The symmetry “handshake” between retrocausality and time-forward causality in PQM giving rise to the world of conscious experience apparently echoes the Andean concept that the present world of experience depends on the meeting and creative encounter between a past related world of established principles and a future-oriented world that is about to rise.

The non-unitarity of the wave function allows for consciousness to manipulate probabilities of experience, possibly combining future probabilities with past probabilities. And this non-unitary evolution of the wave function is mathematically possible and coherent utilizing Roderick Sutherland’s formalism which allows for retrocausation through closed time loops. According to Sarfatti, this situation would be compatible with Herbert Fröhlich’s idea that a non-linear, creative, cohering influence on mesoscopic and macroscopic energy-pumped, open systems far from equilibrium which - like living organisms – would resist environmental decoherence.   Frohlich was the author of “The Connection between Macro- and Micro-physics,” and, according to Sarfatti, this “is intimately connected with locally-retrocausal PQM back-reactions violation of the de Broglie guidance equation that was assumed by Bohm in his 1952 pilot wave theory.” Source: file:///C:/Users/holo1/Downloads/Solving_the_Hard_Problem_Mind-Matter-Con.pdf

Tuesday, August 22, 2017

Reflections on Telepathy, Dr.Vallée's Cybernetic Control and the 'Non Local'

Reflections on Telepathy, Vallée’s Cybernetic Control and the ‘Non-Local’
By Giorgio Piacenza

Dr. Jacques Vallée proposes that, between different cosmic species (like Earth human and ET or even beyond a physically limited ET or an “other” kind of being that is illegible under simple physicalist anthropological biases), the distinction between the signifier and signified (the symbolic representation and its meaning) can be quite different or even arbitrary and, thus, abductees can experience an incommensurability problem. And this would be why so often contacts manifest disconcerting degrees of “absurdity” to our human minds. (Read: “Incommensurability, Orthodoxy and the Physics of High Strangeness: A 6-layer Model for Anomalous Phenomena)

I think that this would be more noticeable when there is little telepathic communication because telepathy by-passes or surpasses these semiotic limitations since, during telepathic communication, we are able to understand meaning more directly or intuitively (and many conceptual angles of it), included associated sensorial perceptions, images, personal interpretive translations, feelings and intentions. Considering the work of Mary Rodwell, this may be why many children with little understanding of comparative symbology apparently adapt with ease and make sense of what UFO intelligences are communicating with them.

Dr. Jacques Vallée also reminds us that wormholes are supposed to allow connections between times in the same universe, parallel universes, different universes that could be considered as different “dimensions” as in other realities. He aks SETI to consider that – the utilization of wormholes - would be useful for physical civilizations to cross vast distances as much as for time traveling civilizations, also for parallel universe civilizations, and perhaps civilizations from “other dimensions” to manifest in our known physical world. (Again, read: “Incommensurability, Orthodoxy and the Physics of High Strangeness: A 6-layer Model for Anomalous Phenomena”)

He asks SETI and Ufologists not to limit in an anthropocentric way what the intelligences behind UAPs (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena, a less prejudiced term for “UFO”) can be and do. Their semiotics could be based on different adaptations. Thus, I think that a necessary way to surpass this limitation would be – by necessity - the universal adoption of telepathy, a capacity that also surpasses the limitations of local space-time restrictions.

And from a systems and cybernetics perspective, posits that the UAP/UFO intelligences phenomenon produces interventions that affect our culture…a “control system” in terms of cybernetics. Moreover, while we could take this phrase “control system” to mean a surreptitious and Machiavellian, manipulative, in cybernetics, a “control system” is not necessarily negative and only for the benefit of one of the parts. Furthermore, Dr. Vallée sometimes reminds us that “they” can also be counter affected. Since control (meaning intelligent control) depends on intelligence and quite likely on awareness, the control of our own system would depend on how much awareness we have to be capable of a change in direction, similar to exerting change over acceleration (or over the rate of change), what would be a third derivative in terms of Newtonian mechanics (as the inventor of the Bell Helicopter, Arthur Young, author of “The Reflexive Universe” would show). First, there is position in spacetime coordinates, then the first derivative, velocity; then the second derivative, acceleration; then the third derivative: change of acceleration, which normally implies intelligent cybernetic control.

Considering (under experiencer-testimonies) the characteristics of intelligent, living spacetime-surpassing “UFO” vehicles and (also under experiencer-testimonies) the integrative, non-mechanical characteristics of a science in which “things” and “subjects” are less distinguishable, the level of awareness that would be needed to exert control, not only on simple physical changes of acceleration of inanimate Newtonian objects but on self-constructing, complex, living societies would have to be non-local…like a 4th Derivative, a higher order extension of “Position” (beyond and inclusive of it) occupying a non-local position outside of spacetime coordinates.

It would be a “situated awareness” rather and, by that, the intelligence needed to exert “control” in the physical world would have to be aware of being aware that it is reflexively intelligent, thus not only able to intelligently control changes of acceleration in physical objects and, thus, to intelligently modify matter in a mechanical way, but also able to control changes in organized, intelligent systems organized by the non-local, experiential interactions of conscious subjects-objects. This would entail awareness of intimate, meaningful (in fact, living) non-local connections that blend subjectivity and objectivity (in a more ontologically symmetrical level) and which can change (less ontologically symmetrical) system-related probabilities. Moreover, this awareness itself would empower UAP/UFO conscious entities to exert influence in their own system and carefully blend it with ours for measured, precise interactions. Then again, own growing awareness rising up to that higher level of connectivity, would, in turn, exert influences on the UAP/UFO intelligences by consciously altering our response when our response is understood (also in Dr. Vallée’s terms) as part of those intelligences´ feedback system.

“I hesitate to be too specific. I'm speaking, as I'm sure you understand, of the attempted manipulation of UFO manifestations. It's a pretty tall order. We're assuming that there is a feedback mechanism involved in the operations of the control system; if you change the information that's carried back to that system, you might be able to infiltrate it through its own feedback.” (Jacques Vallée, )

The UAP/UFO intelligences may interact and exert some influence while situated in a higher order and exert more influence (especially symbolic influence) while “coming down” to our order of things but, in doing so, they would also be exposing themselves up to be more influenced by us thus (in order to avoid our feedback to modify their own experiential probabilities) they would have one more good reason (besides our customary bellicose ways) for their semi-covert, cautious manners.
Giorgio Piacenza

Tuesday, September 20, 2016

Usefulness of the Hyper Cube for Inter-Reality Connections?

Speculations about the Tesseract (Giorgio Piacenza).

After listening to a contactee friend (Ricardo Gonzalez) about working with the visualization of a Tesseract (hypercube) in order to manifest intention, while working in a coherent group effort with deeper levels of mind, I delved into geometry and found a relation with what Dr. Nassim Haramein explains about the "Vector Equilibrium" connected with the 64 Tetrahedron grid. 

The Rhombic Dodecahedron formed by diamond-shaped faces is inscribed in the Vector Equilibrium also known as "Cube Octahedron." The Vector Equilibrium would be a most fundamental geometric form which combines with the 64 Tetrahedron grid maintaining in balance and symmetry the multi-directional forces at the Zero Point energy or Quantum Vacuum. It would also connect energetically and informationally all of the physical universe in a fractal manner where toroids as vortices circulate going within and coming without physical manifestation.  

Each point of the Rhombic Dodecahedron points to a face of the Vector Equilibrium or Cube Octahedron and both geometric forms complement each other. But the Rhombic Dodecahedron not only is inscribed in the Vector Equilibrium or Cube Octahedron but it also is the “shadow” or 3D geometrical projection of the Tesseract hypercube in 4D. 

In all of these cases we are still speaking only of "spatial dimensions" and these types of dimensions should not be confused with whole physical and non-physical realities. Technically speaking “dimension” is not synonymous with “reality,” plane of existence or anything like that.  It is a necessary parameter (offering restriction and possibility) within a reality system.

According to messages received by another contactee friend of mine (Luis Fernando Mostajo), there would be a dodecahedron at the center of the Earth. 

Now, the geometric “dual” of the rhombic dodecahedron is the Cube Octahedron and the Cube Octahedron is the “shadow” or lower dimensional 3D projection of the 4D Tesseract. This is analogous to how a 2D hexagon is the shadow of a 3D cube.

Could we be receiving or becoming aware of the first steps on how to use geometries that allow connections of vortices situated between physical and non-physical realities? That is, between the mental and the physical realms? 

Perhaps the nodes where lines cross in a 4D Tesseract correspond (in lower  3D spatial projections) to some of Earth’s so-called “power points.” These nodes would also point to the faces of an even higher dimensional 5D form which would not only relate with matter and energy but with information according to the physical theory  of Burkhardt Heim (pointed out to me by Mr. James Fellow). Heim's theory proposes spatial dimensions for concrete matter, for energy levels, and for information.  

Visualizing a Tesseract in specific ways on specific spots of the Earth and in a group - coherent ways may be a means for consciousness to access the information level that would, in turn, connect with the concrete physical level.

Monday, September 5, 2016

Modifying G + other alleged discoveries through the Relativistic Dimensional Analysis of Dr. José Álvarez López

I have an interesting scientific paper dating from 1961 and written by the late Professor José Álvarez López  (PhD in Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics from the Universidad de La Plata, Argentina. He died in 2007 at the age of 93) . The work involves the modification of G (the Gravitational Constant), determining atomic constants through a form of relativistic dimensional analysis and more.

Many decades ago, Dr. Álvarez López was known as one of the few persons knowledgeable in General Relativity in Argentina (and in the world). He briefly worked at Lawrence Livermore and self published several theoretical propositions and alleged findings that -in my view- still need to be carefully peer reviewed. 

I have a rather succinct publication written by Álvarez López and which might be of interest. It is titled "Relativistic Dimensional Analysis" and claims that by modifying G dividing it by 1- v2/c2 and placing this modified G in Lagrange equations, we arrive to Einstein's equations for planetary motion. He also proposes that Eötvöss' experiments focused upon a relation that could qualify as 'masses at rest'. He claims that Eötvöss' experiments say nothing in regard to the relativistic behavior of masses in relative motion. Álvarez López's work may shed some conceptual light on the apparent 'antigravity' results more recently obtained in torsion experiments in which perhaps our understanding of the Equivalence Principle may have to be modified. Since José Álvarez Lopez´s key ideas date back to 1947, if proven correct or essentially sound, they should be recognized even after death.

His work also delves into a distinction between universal and empirical constants and a relativistic dimensional method for arriving through deduction to a list of values very closely corresponding to the atomic constants. Moreover, by setting either the simultaneity of space or of time when using Lorenzian transformations, apparently two sets of indeterminate or ambivalent relativistic results come up for time and for length. 

In relation to this ambivalence in relativistic formulas and in a personal conversation which took place in Paris with count Louis de Broglie, Dr. Álvarez López was told to distinguish between the "time of waves" and the "time of corpuscles." In my layman's view this seems to connect aspects of General Relativity with Quantum Physics.

I think that, since Álvarez López extolled Tolman's 'Principle of Similitude' and also his own 'Principle of Variational Homegeneity' and had the courage to delve into some rather forgotten aspects of physics, his work was only privately well-regarded by a few distinguished scientists. 

For example, he was interested in the role of the adimensional or non-dimensional 'constant' alpha and of invariant principles connected to the epistemological possibility of carefully developing an a priori, deductive way of practicing science, a rational-platonic way that would complement the empirical approach.

Due to a recognition of the possibility of developing an aprioristic, deductive type of physics based on general principles, some of Dr. Álvarez López's work seems adequate to add to a discussion about the role of Interiority and meaning in Physics, a science that has mostly focused upon Exteriority and objects. This could further a way to deal with the fundamental role - or perhaps inevitable - of consciousness in the physical universe.

In my conversations with Dr. Álvarez López, he told me that he had conducted research at the Electrophysical Technical Institute under the direction of professor Köning in Munich, Germany; at the Institute for Advanced Studies, directed by professor James Mc Connell in Dublin, Ireland; and at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, in Berkeley, California, where he had been invited by professor Luis W. Alvarez in 1975 to research the “Behavior of Joule’s Law in Electrical Coronas.” There also were favorable personal or letter exchanges with scientists like Alexander Wilkens, Burnington Brown, David Bohm, William R. Corliss, Kiril Stanjukovich, J.L. Synge and Dr. de Puymorin, former director of France’s Space Commission.

Perhaps, Álvarez López's ideas may still be useful to enhance current investigations. I'm only trying to share this possibility asking proper scientists to review it. This particular publication "Relativistic Dimensional Analysis" is 20 pages long, translated into English (
with some typos) and is rather easy to read. It includes some clear equations. If you care to take a look at this material please inform me.

Thank you very much.

Yours truly,
Giorgio Piacenza

Sunday, November 29, 2015

Scalar Waves

Scalar Waves: What could they Be?
Giorgio Piacenza 

Nikola Tesla showed he could send electrical energy without wires. It turned out not to be good for business and it was also classified.  He used longitudinal waves. The field pointer travel in the direction of propagation, much like sound waves and plasma waves do. Their potential is “scalar” but longitudinal wave vectors can be produced from them.  However, they are simply called “scalar waves.” They can be used to send both information and energy. They could be used to heal or to alter a person or perhaps even an entire community. They can be imprinted with information patterns. They cannot be shielded by Faraday cages and apparently go through matter similar to neutrinos. They may even acquire neutrinos and gain energy from them as Dr. Konstantine Meyl posits. Dr. Meyl has reproduced Tesla's technology of generating electric scalar waves and demostrates it. He also enhanced Maxwell's equations and discovered magnetic scalar waves which may affect biological systems and be used by them to communicate with lettle or no "noise."

These 'scalar' longitudinal waves have closed field lines and cannot be easily detected. These longitudinal waves apparently acquire energy from the vacuum as they propagate so the possibility of extracting extra energy from our link as an open system to the vacuum of space, allowing for an (improperly called) “free energy,” exists. Their Poynting vector would coincide with the direction of propagation and - as a particulate aspect - we can visualize them as hidden vortical pulses themselves made of standing vortices and counter vortices.…perhaps expressions of a dynamic double torus geometry multi-fractal level connection and dynamism allowed by Nassim Haramein’s 64 tetrahedron grid and the isotropic vector matrix and vector equilibrium exchange of information and energies beyween deep and exterior levels in the quantum vacuum.

Perhaps, as Dr. Steven Greer says, an object can be made to resonate using high voltage, high frequency, low amperage electric energy field, being affected so as to tilt outside of spacetime (its spin?) and made to disappear into another “dimension.” I think that what Dr. Greer calls “dimension” actually is another "parallel" physical reality system stemming from a different ratio of how Subtle-Mental and Physical Realms combine. Perhaps the type of Poynting vector and electric field used to achieve this effect derives from using electric scalar waves. Energy moving in the direction of propagation is more convergent and may go back into the center of the zero-point vortex. Perhaps the Hutchinson Effect is also based on producing a scalar field and effects taking place by means of – for instance – a specific interference or space-time/time-space mutually canceling “clash” of static and alternating current fields.   

Scalar waves travel faster than light and their variable speed would primarily depend on wavelength and frequency modulation and other factors would be vacuum permittivity and (I suppose) the virtual particle energetic density of the quantum vacuum. 

Scalar waves provide communication between the transmitter and receiver as a single whole system. The transmitter “knows” if the receiver is on.  Through resonance the receiver acquires electrical energy can operate a motor or light a LED without being hooked to an external power source or a battery. I think that these waves may have a negentropic effect and serve to collect “negative energy states” that could help us to open worm holes, distort space time metric through crystalline (and quasi crystals?) ring toroidal capacitor, and/or making them (similar to plasma waves as per their equations) rotate and counter-rotate producing a specific gravity-cancelling resonant frequency.  These scalar component, its vector vortices would exist as an inside component in the overall electromagnetic structure and were even considered possible in Maxwell’s original equations (formulated in his “quaternions” with one real and three imaginary components) but were simplified by Oliver Heaviside in which the vector for scalar field was made  = 0.

With the over-simplification, the possibility of contacts with realities beyond 3 spatial and 1 time-forward dimensions was “normalized.” Something similar happened with the dismissal of the negative square root solution of the Klein-Gordon equation and to a few other counter-intuitive (non-classical) but probably valid proposals in physics. As Dr. Scott Virden Anderson mentions in his “Putting Subtle Energies on the Scientific Map” QUATERNIONS (associated with the loss of commutation algebraic and geometric properties and with autopoietic or self- organizing and self-maintaining systems) may be used to describe the first levels of subtle energy (in between the physical and higher realms). Also, even more complex algebras (like octonions and sedenions) may also be appropriate to represent still higher/deeper subtle realms. 

As Thomas Bearden and Konstantine Meyl explain, electrodynamic textbooks repeat the simplification and preserve limited future scientific developments and scientists have been repeating that ever since. In my view, it goes along with a temporary tendency and taboo against anything not corresponding classical intuitive perceptions but this can be overcome. The longitudinal waves were suppressed and speed-of-light-limit-obeying (spacetime limited) transversal Hertzian waves have been used in technological applications until today. Thus, in relation to the competing views between Tesla and Hertz, Hertz won the day for the conventional ‘vanilla’ (other realities, the “paranormal” and parapsychology-rejecting) 'scientific' and conventionally educated world. 

The longitudinal waves can be considered as standing wave vortices and I believe more like the counter-rotating, less visible vortex accompanying – for instance – tornadoes. They would be like the 'insides' of the exterior quadrants of Integral Theory. 

The scalar component may possibly relate more directly not only with negentropy but with retrocausal influences allowed in quantum-relativistic Klein-Gordon equation. They might be a key to increasing the symmetry  between Direct Space Time and Reciprocal Time Space  by allowing access to the latter, information-frequency predominant domain, including its negentropic qualities. By harnessing the negentropic – normally hidden – aspect we might cancel spacetime and return parts of it to its origin in the non-physical Subtle-Mental (astral) Realm. This could be done in various ratios (allowing greater interaction with that more fundamental realm) or perhaps it can be done completely to transfer completely outside of spacetime (and its complementary time-space).   


American Anti-Gravity (2009). "The Hutchinson Effect: technical Interview with John Hutchinson." Retrieved from: 

Bearden, T.E. (2002). "Energy from the Vacuum." Santa Barbara, Cheniere Press.

Greer, S. (2014). "The Crossing Point of Light." Retrieved from 

Haramein, N. (2013). "Quantum Gravity and the Holographic Mass." 

Hutchinson, J. (2009). "Hutchinson Effect: Objects Levitate, Metals Mutate, Time Travel" Retrieved from  

Meyl, K. "Scalar waves Theory and Experiments"
Retrieved from  

Pandora's Box (2014). "Nassim Haramein, The structure of the Vacuum and Crop Circles" Retrieved from 

Friday, January 11, 2013

Possibility of Self-Propulsion in UFOs, Non Equivalence and Interpenetration

Possible Disparity between the Inertial and Gravitational Masses in Einstein’s Formulas, according to Professor Jose Alvarez Lopez, PhD. Can this Lead to the Possibility of Self-Propulsion and the Interpenetration of Integral Theory's Quadrants?
Giorgio Piacenza Cabrera
Are two equal masses completely equivalent if one is at rest and the other is accelerating or perhaps in a rotational movement? Is the Gravitational Constant really a true constant and unchanging? In this article, I inform that by correcting the Gravitational Constant and then introducing it to Lagrange’s equations for planetary motion Jose Alvarez Lopez PhD, apparently came up with Einstein’s correct equations for planetary motion. Thus, G at motion or changing position (applicable to inertial mass) would not be equivalent to G at rest (as gravitational mass).This would allow the possibility of self-propulsion which, in turn, might be linked to the Subtle Realm relational logic that would allow characteristics of opposite quadrants to interpenetrate. In this case the intelligence of the left quadrants in Ken Wilber’s “Integral Theory” might be able to organize objective, physical structures under what is known as “autopoiesis.”   
Professor Jose Alvarez Lopez (1914-2007) held PhD’s in mathematics, Physics and Chemistry from the University of La Plata, Argentina. In 1956 he personally published in Cordoba, Argentina “The Time Concept in Special Relativity,” “The Concept of Mass in General Relativity,” “The Principle of Variational Homogeneity” and “The Meaning of the Clock Paradox.” In 1961 he published “Relativistic Dimensional Analysis.” Then in 1968, Alvarez Lopez published “Gravitational Interference in the Einstein Effect” and “La Thesis Electromagnetique de Poincaré-Cremieux” (with the Faculty of Sciences at the University of Röen). In 1972 was published “Relativistic Space Propulsion” (also in Cordoba, Argentina) and in 1976 “About the Non Existence of Electronic Inertia in Metallic Conductors” (with the Real Academia de las Ciencias, Madrid, Spain).
This Professor was keenly aware of the epistemological issues raised by modern physics and didn’t hesitate to tackle them as an experimentalist, a deductive physicist, a mathematician and even by adventuring into less scientifically orthodox areas of knowledge. For instance, besides orthodox works in physics, he also wrote about more speculative matters such as Yoga, Cybernetics, Archeology, and about the profound but unappreciated mathematical, engineering and astronomical knowledge apparently possessed by the ancient Hebrews and Egyptians. As expected in a scientifist world, this got him in trouble with many of his colleagues.
Many years ago, during a series of interviews I enjoyed with Professor Alvarez Lopez in Miami, Florida in Icho Cruz, Cordoba, Argentina, Professor Alvarez Lopez  told me that he had conducted research under the direction of Professor Giorgio Piccardi at the Laboratory of the Institute of Chemistry and Physics in Florence, Italy. He also told me that he had conducted research at the Electrophysical Technical Institute under the direction of professor Köning in Munich, Germany; at the Institute for Advanced Studies, directed by professor James Mc Connell in Dublin, Ireland; and in the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, in Berkeley, California, where he had been invited by professor Luis W. Alvarez in 1975 to research the “Behavior of Joule’s Law in Electrical Coronas.” He also informed me that he had received positive commentaries from Albert Einstein (shortly before his death) and met in Paris with Count Louis de Broglie. There also were favorable personal or letter exchanges with scientists like Alexander Wilkens, Burnington Brown, David Bohm, William R. Corliss, Kiril Stanjukovich, J.L. Synge and Dr. de Puymorin, former director of France’s Space Commission.  
I’m not an accredited physicist but, basically possess a well-informed layman’s concern and -in reporting on some of my conversations with Professor Jose Alvarez Lopez- I’m trying to bring up ideas which may still be important to the physics community and, subsequently, to science, metaphysics and philosophy in general. Perhaps the ideas were too controversial during the Professor Alvarez Lopez’s lifetime but nowadays a paradigm like the “Equivalence Principle” is being questioned. Professor Alvarez Lopez did manage to publish some of his ideas in Argentina and non-English speaking countries but, while recognized by some, was (perhaps due to his metaphysical and epistemological interests) also considered to be too extravagant by others who didn’t have the time or the inclination to carefully read his work and review it.  However, perhaps the Professor’s work could still nowadays add to our knowledge of the possibility of manipulating how objects respond to gravity or exert gravitational forces.  For instance, I ask (hoping not to venture into the nonsensical) whether the General Relativity formulas (under a modified Gravitational Constant) allow for an asymmetry between inertial and gravitational masses so that now a Coulomb Effect in rotational masses might become a self-propulsive distortion of space-time. Perhaps some kind of directional space-time torsion field producing an effective vector force could be generated.
There were interesting reports of alleged discoveries. For instance, during some personal meetings, Professor Alvarez Lopez told me that he and his group of experimentalists in Argentina had developed a micrometer that had shown that electrons didn’t possess mass in electrical conductors. He had also apparently found that the atomic constants were coordinated by the non- dimensional ‘atomic constant’ “alpha,” also known as the “Fine Structure Constant.” Moreover, after learning about a strange experimental effect in Argentina in which (after pumping DC current for several days along an ‘antenna’ aligned with the local geomagnetic field) the total output of energy seemed greater than the input, and Alvarez Lopez allegedly conducted a partially related experiment at Lawrence Livermore under the auspices of Dr. Luis W. Alvarez.     
Certainly, I’m not a physicist but for several decades I’ve been pondering and gradually learning about a few relevant issues in philosophy of science and have read a broad range of popular books on quantum physics and cosmology. I hope that, in reporting on some of these conversations with Professor Jose Alvarez Lopez, I’ll bring to the attention of suitable academics ideas which –if confirmed true- could be fundamentally important to science, metaphysics, ontology, philosophy and humanity in general.
I would like to present some of Professor Alvarez Lopez’s alleged findings that also seem to connect Einstein’s Special and General Relativity. I’m would like to see knowledgeable physicists review the Professor’s works (like “Relativistic Dimensional Analysis”) and verify or discard if he was correct in concluding that Einstein overlooked a certain disparity between Inertial Mass and Gravitational Mass. The 1961 publication titled “Relativistic Dimensional Analysis" explains much better than I many of his ideas in relation to the issues raised. It is a matter of finding this and other works to carefully review them.
Here I also want to make reference to research papers dealing with the possibility that orthodox concepts about gravity and the Equivalence Principle can be modified, complemented or challenged. For instance, an article written by Japanese physicists Hideo Hayasaka and Sakae Takeuchi titled “Anomalous Weight Reduction on a Gyroscope’s Right Rotations about the Vertical Axis on the Earth” published in the December 18, 1989 issue of Physical Review Letters. Seems to show that charged rotating masses alter the gravitational field.
I also found that the results reported by Hayasaka and Takeuchi had been questioned in 1990 by Dr. S.H. Salter, a mechanical engineer at the University of Edinburgh who, (while not trying to replicate the original findings with a similar amount of magnetic material also used) proposed that vibrations in the ball bearings of the rotating gyro could explain the effects. Reference: S. H. Salter, Nature, (February 4, 1990).
Nevertheless, a few years later, Hideo Hayasaka et al. wrote an article after conducting experiments that seem to back support the results published in 1989. It is titled “Possibility for the Existence of Antigravity: Evidence from a Free-Fall Experiment Using a Spinning Gyro” and was published in Speculations in Science and Technology, 20 (173-181) (1997). The online link is     
Moreover, some other experiments seem to corroborate Hayakawa and Takeuchi’s basic results, thus bringing to question the Equivalence Principle. For example, “The Phenomenon of Weight Reduction of a Spinning Wheel,” written by R. Waite for Mechanica: An International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Mechanics Volume 42, Number 4, 359-364, presents an alleged general validation of the original results.
Then again (and still related to these issues) another article appearing in Physical Review Letters makes the case that the Equivalence Principle may be violated by the action of the still mysterious “Dark Energy.”  The reference is “Dark Energy as a Born-Infeld Gauge Interaction Violating the Equivalence Principle” by A. Füzfa and J.M. Alimi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 061301 (2006). The online link is:
Then, can information be the source for space, inertia and gravity? Read Erik P. Verlinde’s plausible and original work 'On the Origin of Gravity and the Laws of Newton' 6 January 2010, at  Apparently, the entropy differences among parts in the universe would generate the gravitational force by distributing matter to maximize overall entropy according to the Second Law of Thermodynamics. A stronger force would be related with a higher entropic probability.
Could physical information be modified by human intention interacting with an information field? According to the former Stanford University Professor emeritus in Material Science and Engineering, William A. Tiller PhD, the gauge symmetry of space can be modified like this. Perhaps this would affect information and, if information is the primary source, then –perhaps- space, time, gravity and inertia as emergent phenomena would also be modified. Read the “white papers” and the “Tiller Model” or watch an interesting interview at
The Gravitational Coupling (adimensional) Constant (GCC) comes to mind as it pertains to how charged particles with mass attract. It is the square of the electron mass in Planck units of mass while alpha is the square of the electron charge in Planck units of charge. The parallels with alpha are interesting but GCC links gravity to charge and should be crucial in the more recent investigations on the origin of mass.
These 'constants' (which as 'pure numbers' can be seen as 'stable' and 'prior' in relation to constants using units of measurement)  may be conceived not as 'true constants' but as modulators of those constants. Their change would also modify the Gravitational Constant. Interestingly, Alvarez Lopez also proposed that G could be relativistically corrected dividing it by 1 - v square/c square. If I'm interpreting this correctly, this could mean that the equivalence principle for two objects in relative motion with each other would have to be modified. Professor Alvarez Lopez then placed the corrected G into a Lagrange equation and arrived at Einstein's equation for planetary motion. He then wrote that "this showed that Einstein correction consisted exactly in transforming the Constant of Gravitation into a Lorentzian invariant." Here again we see Alvarez Lopez´s search for the interplay between a 'prior' factor and a 'dependent' factor.
In "Relativistic Dimensional Analysis" there’s a claim that by modifying G (dividing it by 1- v2/c2 and placing this modified G in Lagrange equations) we arrive to Einstein's equations for planetary motion. Alvarez Lopez also proposed that Eötvoss' experiments testing the Equivalence Principle focused upon a relation that could qualify as 'masses at rest'. He claimed that Eötvoss' experiments say nothing in regards to the relativistic behavior of masses in relative motion. 
Professor Alvarez Lopez told me that Einstein’s General Relativity Theory was “a perfect theory based upon two errors: 1. The equivalence between inertial and gravitational mass, which he tacitly assumed and 2. The constancy of the Gravitational Constant, which he also tacitly assumed.” Then he asserted that “the error about the Equivalence Principle corrects the error about the Gravitational Constant.
G0 (corrected Gravitational Constant) =   G/(1-v^2 /c^2 )       Then, according to Alvarez Lopez, if G0 is utilized in Lagrange’s formula we obtain Einstein’s formula for planetary motion, a formula that took Einstein 20 pages of tensorial calculus to obtain. Professor Alvarez Lopez also said that “this shows that it is easier to arrive to the same results by starting from Electrodynamics and moving to General Relativity because √(1-v^2  c^2 )  is obtained from Special Relativity which pertains to Electrodynamics. Einstein achieved the formulas but not the theory.” 
Thus, Professor Alvarez Lopez also discovered that Einstein was using two kinds of masses: The relative mass of Special Relativity, where mass is a function of velocity and the absolute mass of General Relativity, in which the mass is constant and, therefore, independent of velocity.
Regarding Length, if L = length at rest L_0= Length during movement L = L_0 √(1-v^2/c^2 )             L< L_0
Regarding Time (alternative equation) T= T_0 √(1-v^2/c^2 )
Also, if G were constant, the formula for the gravitational force would be equivalent to the formula of the centrifugal force so that F = G (m M)/r^2  = m w^2 r
Jose Alvarez Lopez’s work delves into a distinction between universal and empirical constants and goes into a relativistic dimensional method for arriving (through a method and deduction) to a list of values very closely corresponding to the atomic constants. Moreover, by setting the simultaneity of Space or of Time when using Lorentzian transformations, two sets of indeterminate or ambivalent relativistic results for time and for length result. In relation to this ambivalence in relativistic formulas and in a personal conversation with Count L. de Broglie, Professor Alvarez Lopez was told that it was important to distinguish between the "time of waves" and the "time of corpuscles." In my layman's understanding this seems to connect aspects of General Relativity with Quantum Physics.
 I think that, since Professor Alvarez Lopez admired Tolman's “Principle of Similitude” and used his own (also quite interesting) “Principle of Variational Homogeneity” and had the courage to delve into some unclearly settled aspects of physics, his work was only privately well-regarded by a few distinguished scientists. For instance Professor Alvarez Lopez was interested in the role of the adimensional 'constant' alpha and of invariant principles connected to the epistemological possibility of carefully developing an a priori, Platonic, rational method that would complement the empirical approach.
Also, Professor Alvarez Lopez claimed that by introducing in the practice of Dimensional Analysis his “Principle of Dimensional Homogeneity” the possibility of determining a priori the constants of nature comes up. Due to this recognition of the possibility of an aprioristic, deductive physics based on general principles, some of Professor Alvarez Lopez’s work seems adequate to explore the role of an intelligent interiority in Physics, typically limited to be a “hard science” mostly focused on structured, stable, and objective Exteriority. Perhaps aspects related to an intelligent, physical autopoiesis, to information and, eventually, to the fundamental role of consciousness in the physical universe would relate with this exploration. In relation to a more complex phase of Integral Theory, the importance of considering Interior, Intelligent aspects hiding (or existing in potential states) in the obvious Physical, Exterior, Objective aspects of the Kosmos (rather than expressing as correlated but distinct quadratic perspectives) arises.
In Jose Alvarez Lopez’s 1961 work titled Relativistic Dimensional Analysis (p.58) we read:
“Tolman proved that with his Principle of Similitude the aprioristic qualitative determination of all the laws of Nature was possible. He also pointed out that this was not the case for Newton’s law of gravitation; and the main objection against Tolman’s Principle of Similitude was that with its help the aprioristic determination of Newton’s law of gravitation was impossible. Owing to this circumstance the Principle of Tolman was rejected as a physical principle. It is surprising to observe that nobody, at that time, considered the other possibility: that the “constant” of the gravitational law were not a real constant of Nature.
The equivalence between gravitational mass and inertial mass, implicit in the Newton law of gravitation, has always appeared as demonstrated by the existing isochronism of penduli formed out of different materials. Later on, Eötvoss confirmed the result of the isochronal experiments with the help of the famous balance, demonstrating that the relationship existing between masses of different substances in regard to the gravitational and inertial actions was invariant at the poles and at the equator. Taking into account that at the equator the action of the gravitational force is somewhat opposed by the centrifugal action due to the rotation of the Earth, this experimental demonstration was considered sufficient proof for the statement of a “Principle of Equivalence” of the gravitational and inertial masses.
All these experiments and analyses have been so amply discussed in the scientific literature that it is surprising that nobody observed that the experiments of Eötvoss –regardless of their extreme accuracy- were performed under conditions we could qualify as static ones: i.e. the relationship between the masses (terrestrial mass and the mass in the balance) is referred to masses at rest. This is the reason why Eötvoss’ experiments say nothing in regard to the relativistic behaviour of masses in relative motion (as, for instance, the masses of a planet and the Sun). In face of such facts -I have analyzed at full length in a previous paper (24) – it is hardly dubious that a physicist will not qualify the relativistic applying of such experiments as “illegitimate extrapolations of experimental results.”
We arrive at the conclusion that nobody has demonstrated the “constant” of the gravitational law is really a constant of Nature, and that in spite of this lack of experimental evidence the constancy of such an entity is an accepted fact of modern physics. Let us think of the methodological mistake involved in the rejection of the Principle of Similitude on the basis of its inability for determining a “constant” that nobody has yet shown to be a constant of Nature.”
The English abstract of Jose Alvarez Lopez’s 1957 work El Concepto de Masa en Relatividad General reads:
“In trying to transform trajectories of a configuration space into geodetic lines of a Riemannian space-time, the author has been led to the discovery of an essential requirement
(where m represents coordinate mass) which he calls “Principle of Identity.” Its name suggests it to be a generalization of the Newtonian “Principle of Equivalence” that allows the discussion of dynamical conditions hitherto not taken into account in the analysis of the quoted Newtonian principle.
In section c the author shows –with the help of the well-known “Einstein elevator” - that unless we accept a principle of identity it will be possible to distinguish between gravitational and inertial forces.”
Professor Alvarez Lopez was one of the first scientists able to understand Albert Einstein’s theories. While he was recognized by some important established scientists, as a Latin American scientist working independently against prevailing dogmas didn’t allow him to be recognized in earnest. In Relativistic Dimensional Analysis, El Concepto de Masa en Relatividad General, The Principle of Variational Homogeneity and Self-Propulsion: A New Flying Technique (some of which may be available through Borderland Sciences, Amazon and Google Books) there are carefully detailed, cogent explanations with step by step mathematical demonstrations that serious scientists willing to learn plausible important corrections to Einstein’s theories can find.
I’m aware that according to Erik P. Verlinde, Phd, gravity can be thought of as a derived entropic force linked to information and probability as the statistical behavior of ‘degrees of freedom’ which can be pictured as encoded (minus one spatial dimension) within the concept of a ‘holographic screen’. Thus gravity would originate in a difference on how much entropy and information is found in the space between two masses in relation to its surroundings: More entropy, more gravity and the more bits of information are required to unscramble and to explain this entropy (because more bits of information have been ‘lost’) would be equivalent to a greater ‘gravitational pull’. Here inertia, gravity and space would be emergent and information primary.
Whether –from another perspective- this pull is also accompanied by a distortion of space-time and to a concentration or dispersal of elementary ‘information space-time units’ this may also be plausible. To me this suggests that the level of reality capable of modifying how much information is required in order to obtain a practical description is more fundamental. Could this be a higher symmetry level which we can tap into through our awareness and perhaps our very capacity to describe a certain space based on information influences how we modify thermodynamically free information? Can our consciousness connected with quantum non locality decrease entropy? Hopefully physicists knowledgeable of these matters will see if Professor Alvarez Lopez’s work is still useful to current discussions in physics.
For a stimulating read find Erik P. Verlinde’s 'On the Origin of Gravity and the Laws of Newton', at
If Professor Alvarez Lopez’s works establish genuine discoveries, they may have many implications. For instance, it may not be possible to adequately define General Relativity in a Riemannian four dimensional space. Perhaps his works agree with the possibility of finding practical ways to increase the disparity between inertial and gravitational masses and therefore of creating unique dynamic effects. Can movement, the Coulomb Effect and vibrational information states be intentionally imprinted/programmed and used to decrease inertia and to tap into zero-point energy potentials in order to manifest controlled self-propulsion?  Might the General Relativity formulas (modified by the inclusion of the non-equivalence of the inertial and gravitational masses) now thus relate with Special Relativity and with Quantum Electrodynamics perhaps allowing an asymmetrical Coulomb Effect to become a self-propulsive distortion of space-time?
Some relevant formulas:
Alvarez Lopez’s Corrected Gravitational Constant  G/√(1-v^2  /c^2 )
                       G= √(1-v^2-c^2 )            
 L = length at rest L_0= Length during movement
L = L_0 √(1-v^2/c^2 )         L< L_0                                L = f (v)         dL/dt≠0        
Alvarez Lopez’s alternative equation L=L_(0 )/ √(1-v^2/c^2 )      L>L_0
M=M_0/√(1-v^2/c^2 )         dM/dt≠0     
T =    T_0/√(1-v^2/c^2 )      T >T_0
Alvarez Lopez’s alternative equation   T= T_0 √(1-v^2/c^2 )       T< T_0
 F= G(m M)/r^2                     F= m w^2 r            F= G(m M)/r^2  = m w^2 r    
Dimensions of the Equivalence principle = (Gravitational Mass)/(Inertial Mass) = 0
Coulomb’s Formula F= (Q_(1  ) Q_2)/(r^2  )
Alvarez Lopez, Jose (1957). El Concepto de Masa en Relatividad General. Cordoba: Imprenta de la Universidad de Cordoba.
Alvarez Lopez, Jose (1961 ). Relativistic Dimensional Analysis. Cordoba: Instituto de Estudios Avanzados.
Wilber, Ken (2006). Integral Spirituality. Boston: Integral Books.