Blog

How can I convince my fellow planetary citizens that religion is the last hope? All religions are benevolent in their non-combative statements. They focus on the miracle of the Now with its infinite opportunities and the sub-miracles of color and other pleasures all provably non-existent in science. For science is the science of the Hades, the shadow world where to be the king is less than to be a slave on the surface of the earth, as Priamus said.

Science can be misused as the atomic bomb illustrates. Science is not science any more if it is lying. Religion says that the Now is a gift and that consciousness is a gentle stroke by the dream-giving instance who waits to be recognized through the fabric of the dream.

Imagine being chosen and being allowed to answer. Young children understand this best. They are the greatest mystics. They still respond to the smile which they recognized as containing the essence. So they invented the suspicion of benevolence being shown towards them, which turned them into persons. The biggest majesties.

How does CERN fit in? Never were there more scientists united in trying to unravel mysteries of the ultra-small. This is an almost religious legacy. It is bound to contribute to future benefit for all. Being so privileged, CERN is not allowed to lie. But this sounds like harsh criticism which never helps as such. Religion says “try to convince and move the heart.”

I can understand that the finding of scientific results which when remaining un-falsified imply that CERN’s activities carry an up to 1 percent risk so far of evaporating the planet in a few years’ time, represents a reason for silent anger on the part of CERN. That the Cologne Administrative Court called for a “safety conference” is especially unsettling. I can understand the fact that the media do not report.

After all, a minority of a few people has not the right to ask for the ear of the planet. So not even if this small minority was hired to sit in the crow’s nest of the Titanic. For this is a religious problem: we all believe in CERN. So we have no right to remind them of their duties. Unless there were a single saintly figure on the planet who believes me that I care when I say “CERN is a religious problem.”

CERN chose to defame me on its 4 years old website but refuses to defend itself against my results from 1998 onwards in every single scientific publication with customarily hundreds of authors each. I call this selective discrimination and technically speaking, scientific fraud.

Scientific fraud is considered forgivable when sensitive results have something to do with security. More recently I found results which have some bearing on plasma confinement. Such topics, of course, are top secret. But the Telemach result — the two years old upshot of my 4-year long criticism — which implies that black holes are stable and uncharged so they cannot but grow exponentially inside earth – reveals on the contrary that what CERN is doing needs to be publicly discussed – unless it is not unethical to sacrifice the globe in a few years’ time with a percentage-range probability.

The world’s press find it logical that such sensitive results with large political implications be kept from the public. The Nobel Foundation likewise acts against its founder’s legacy by not calling for a scientific contest across the globe to defuse the danger.

What do my readers advise me to do in a situation in which the only request made is, please to stop denying the benefit of falsification to my results in a safety conference as officially requested by the Cologne Administrative Court on January 27, 2011? The fact that not a single scientist steps forward to take the responsibility on his or her shoulders by saying that there is no danger and why, is a tiny little bit alarming, or is it not?

This is the first time that an instantaneous “paradigm shift” — abandonment of a reigning scientific consensus — is of vital importance for everyone. We have three months’ time left to achieve this goal while the menacing machine is under overhaul.

What is the subject matter that I am talking about? It is Einstein. More specifically, it is his “happiest thought” as he always called it. It consists in travelling in one’s mind in a constantly accelerating rockettship, and as such proves even more fertile than has been thought for a century. The implied new change of size, mass, and charge (independently discovered by professor Richard J. Cook of the Airforce Academy Colorado Springs) implies that an artificial black hole grows exponentially fast inside earth after eluding every detector when freshly produced by CERN in fulfillment of its high-flying intentions.

The proof is contained in a paper which is now “in print” again in a scientific journal after the journal that had accepted it for publication three years ago got closed-down to theoretical-physics topics retroactively, on the occasion of the retirement of its founding editor who promptly got publicly libeled by the competing journal “Nature.” The founding editor is now a presidential candidate for Egypt in recognition of his scientific achievements.

Why is the result in question so uniquely sensitive? On the one hand, this is because it may save your family, which is good news for everyone. On the other, it implies that a certain nuclear machine needs re-evaluation before it is too late, which is bad news for CERN. The scientific “safety conference” called for by the Cologne Administrative Court on the 27th of last January still goes unheeded by the United Nations which treasure their “observer status” at their sister organization, CERN. In the absence of my paper being in print, it was formally possible for the UN to screen CERN from criticism by disallowing the world’s press to report on a topic which lies before the UN Security Council for many months. This situation has changed with the paper being in print in a scientific journal.

But did the resistance shown up until now not come from the most honorable people who stuck to the accepted paradigm of 4 years ago? This is correct. So why worry? It is because of the new implications of the Einstein equivalence principle of 1907 that now suddenly cannot be ignored any longer. This fact lets Einstein outshine every other scientist for the second century in a row.

The loud silence of the physics community when CERN refused to double-check on the new scientific evidence can no longer be maintained now, for formal reasons. CERN’s public attitude of considering double-checking to be more dangerous than the danger thereby to be eschewed, is suddenly open to worldwide ridicule. Giordano Bruno got incinerated out of dogmatism 411 years ago. Today’s dogmatism is ready to incinerate the whole planet in order to punish a singly dissident who, in addition, is even no longer alive. Bruno would have chuckled about this confirmation of his worst fears.

Germany once consciously risked the onslaught of the atomic bomb by dismissing Einstein. To date, the whole planet consciously risked the onslaught of the black-hole bomb by dismissing Einstein. Only a presidential candidate stood by Einstein — the above-mentioned editor who also is the inventor of the physical E-infinity theory which is the first proposal for an encompassing (exo) description of all of Nature. Einstein would have been delighted about either feat. The whole world looks to Egypt with gratitude.

Alethophobia is “fear of the truth.” To choose to rather die than learn the truth is the ultimate example. The latter case is only topped by the decision to rather commit panbiocide (extinction of all life) than double-check. This is CERN’s feat for 4 years which led it to shooting sharp for one year, with the intrinsic delay between shooting and shrinking the earth being of the order of magnitude of 5 years.

But CERN is an honorable institution! Would it then prevent dissemination of the fact that a court requested the logically necessary safety conference last January?

They may have their reasons, so I hear you say in the comforting company of the loud silence shown by the world media and the upcoming world climate conference of the IPPC at Durban, South Africa.

Therefore it is perhaps of some interest to the planet’s media that CERN is cheating scientifically. Its last hundreds-of-authors long papers both exhibit scientific fraud. One has to do with the planetary danger of black-hole production, the other transports CERN’s claim to have falsified Einstein. Let me give the two-fold evidence here.

Scientific fraud # 1: “No black holes have been found.” This is the message of the big paper No. 1, …………………. This message is most comforting – were it not for the fact that the paper leaves unquoted a relevant paper published in July 2008 (among others that are mostly still on the Internet) which proves that the detectors at CERN are blind to freshly generated black holes: …………………………………

If “Armageddon consciously embraced” is too sensitive a topic for your nerves, then the second CERN paper offers a respite.

Scientific fraud # 2: “Einstein’s speed limit exceeded and hence causality gone.” This is the message of the big paper No. 2, ……………………(second version). This message is as bombastic as a claimer as the first was as a disclaimer. It leaves unquoted the only paper which proves that an analogous result — differing only in magnitude — is a direct implication of Einstein’s theory: …………………………………….

By withholding this information from the reader, CERN deprived itself of the chance to pinpoint the error made by them which — as shown in the suppressed paper — lies in the faulty use of the Global Positioning System (G.P.S.). There is hearsay information now that CERN is planning to implement a light-based control experiment as suggested in the suppressed paper.

With its policy of “open non-quotation,” CERN has made itself vulnerable to the public reproach of scientific fraud. Putting billions of dollars into an experiment with blind detectors is the ultimate fraud in the eye of a tax payer. Maybe this eye is more vigilant than the eye of a doting mother or father given reason to fear CERN’s activity more directly.

Now let us all see whether the world media and the IPPC continue to be effectively bribed by CERN in a situation of global financial crisis.

(Note: Since I have to leave acutely for a court hearing in a somewhat related context, I shall finish this post on my return. The media will no doubt be able to fill in the 4 links in the meantime. Otherwise please wait.)

Doing an unsafe experiment is unprofessional. Refusing to check a proof of implied danger is unheard of. And when the danger is the worst of human history, the decision to ignore it and go ahead acquires an eery touch.

My request to be allowed to give a talk at CERN was not granted although the CERN young scientists had invited me years before. My kind request to the scientific community to come up with a counter-proof to my results met with dead silence after an early attempt had fizzled. The logically required scientific safety conference is being denied for almost 4 years. The identical request made subsequently by a court – the Cologne Administrative Court – on last January the 27th, is refused to be reported by the media. (Only an Internet newspaper reported on it, in German, www.heise.de/tp/artikel/34/34302/1.html .)

Allow me to briefly repeat the relevant facts:

1) There is a finite probability that the LHC machine of CERN can produce miniature black holes. This hope was one of the major reasons why the “Large Hadron Collider” was built.

2) My gothic-R theorem of 2007 and my simpler Telemach theorem of 2009 imply that black holes have radically new properties. There exists no counter-proof up until now. Moreover, the Telemach theorem was independently found by professor Richard J. Cook of the U.S. Air Force Academy.

3) The new properties include “absence of Hawking radiation” and “absence of charged black holes.” Both classic features are tokens of the standard physical world view, the former proposed 38 years ago by a maverick young scientist, the second is the essence of the 95 years old standard Reissner-Nordstöm metric. CERN’s maximum-performance detectors are because of Telemach unable both to detect and to exclude black holes.

4) It is embarrassing to have such a big result on hand. A presented proof implies the necessity either of a counterproof or of diverging empirical evidence, which both are far and wide between. Unfortunately, the new result greatly enhances the probability of experimental success. Simultaneously, the new unchargedness of black holes implies that charged particles like electrons cannot have a zero diameter — so “string theory” has a first empirical basis owing to Telemach.

5) The mini black holes produced at CERN will in the case of success in their vast majority pass right through the earth to thereafter disappear for good. But the first of the maximally rare ultra-slow specimens endowed with a velocity of less than the Kepler speed of 11 kilometers per second, will stay inside earth.

6) After hours or weeks of uneventful orbiting inside earth, the trapped mini black hole will eventually pass close enough to a charged quark to cause it to start circling-in. This event momentarily increases the mini-black hole’s attractive power by more than 30 orders of magnitude, causing the mini black hole to become an “ultra-mini quasar” — an electro-gravitational engine. The main property of this engine is exponential growth inside matter.

7) It is then only a matter of time – a few years — until the exponentially growing seed has eaten the earth inside out so as to turn it into a 2-cm black hole itself.

8) The resulting terrestrial mini-quasar will keep the moon in its orbit, making for a splendid sight to an imaginary lunar resident. Only by proving Telemach wrong can terrestrial safety be restored.

In the wake of these 8 points, I now ask my fellow earthlings not to become scared too much. The odds for the worst case lie still below one percent. The almost 1 trillion maximum-energy collisions achieved by CERN up until now lie markedly below the originally planned number so that, with some luck, the accumulated danger lies well below the one percent level.

After 5 or ten years of waiting we shall know better. Up until then, the experiment should not be resumed – unless, of course, someone succeeds in finding a counterproof to the Cook-Rossler theorem. The odds for this to happen are optimal if the long overdue safety conference is convoked in the coming three months – before the planned resumption of proton-proton collisions at CERN.

This particular “falsification task” represents the noblest scientific goal of history.

CERN’s refusal to quote scientific criticism for years represents anti-scientific behavior. The obvious explanation: a military-like obedience. All German university professors can be dishonorably discharged five years into the past while having to pay back their gross salaries for telling the truth, as happened to my wife, an endocrinologist. A similar obedience law is manifestly effective in the German-led European mini-state of CERN.

All 10.000 CERN scientists obeyed the order not to quote my results but proceed with the experiment in defiance. They thereby shut themselves out of the scientific community, a fraud that is bound to cost CERN the privilege to grant PhDs. But this academic consequence is negligible by comparison.

My danger-proving results were first sent to Dr. Mangano in early 2008, to be published in July the same year (long before his in this respect mute ”Safety Report” appeared). They survived a discussion with the Max-Planck-Institut für Gravitationsphysik in March 2009 and got since sharpened into the “Telemach” theorem on the Internet. Telemach remains un-contradicted by all colleagues while confirmed independently by professor Richard J. Cook, Air Force Academy, whose arxiv paper “Gravitational space dilation” arrived independently at T, L, M (the Time, Length, Mass change of Telemach) and was followed by an explicit confirmation of number 4 (the charge change, Ch) which I was asked to make public.

If our joint result stays un-disproved, then the implications are unprecedented: a new situation brought upon every earthling – not to survive the next 5 years with an apparently percentage-range probability. By inflicting such horror, Europe makes itself an enemy of every person on the planet.

I asked Shimon Peres’s help 4 years ago, as well as the pope’s (who had written me a kind letter while still a cardinal when Ezer Weizmann and Saudi Arabia were busy to found Lampsacus hometown of all persons on the Internet). I am the only member of the Third Order of Saint Francis of Jewish faith – I hope I will not be expelled for that. Religion has the mission to save lives in reflecting the goodness of the DOLGI (dream-of-life giving instance) whose real name be blessed.

The development brought about by CERN during the last 4 years – a trillion maximum-energy proton-proton collisions performed with detectors proven to be blind to the most hoped-for outcome, black holes — is without precedent. It represents living proof that there is no genuine science left on the planet. While the LHC experiment of CERN is potentially grandiose, it is unscientific for the risk incurred by skipping the scientific safety conference necessary in view of the new properties of the hoped-for black holes. There exists a second big profession on the planet – the biomedical one – that is exclusively devoted to saving lives. The doctors have no idea that their non-Hippocratic colleagues are playing with the lives of all. The fact that the trespassers take their own families hostage testifies to the same “courage” as shown by the evil-doers of the last century.

A new “Anti-Einsteinism” lies at the root (compare the recent “faster-than-light” campaign by CERN). The most intelligent person of history was Jewish and proudly so. I therefore ask the government in Jerusalem to apologize for its early refusal to act — by convoking the “safety conference” requested in vain from the German government by the Cologne Administrative Court on January 27, 2011.

The urgent tone in my voice is only meant to pledge, not to assault. I hope that the refused safety conference does not strike you as a crime worth punishing but as a chance for repair. The brotherhood of all persons implies planet-wide non-cruelty, as my late friend Emmanuel Lévinas proved.