This one, needless to say, over at phys.org caught my eye for a variety of reasons, and apparently caught the eyes of many of you as well, for many of you emailed it to me. I'll get into the reasons it caught my eye in a moment, but first the article itself:

Physicists extend special relativity beyond the speed of light

The abstract of the paper is here:

Einstein's special relativity beyond the speed of light

Now, before I proceed, let it be noted that my comments are based off the summary provided by phys.org, not the actual paper by James M. Hill and Barry J. Cox. That said, let's begin. I've long been fascinated by the idea that the velocity of light may represent a kind of boundary condition between two very different sets of theoretical phenomena, and it would appear from the summary of their paper by phys.org, that this is the approach taken by Hill and Cox, who have developed extensions of the Lorentz transformations into superluminal conditions. This approach, at first hearing - and again without the benefit of reading their paper - appears to have similar conceptual approaches to aspects of Heim theory as well, where the velocity of light acts as a kind of boundary condition between classes of spaces and phenomena.

But what gives me pause here is the implication that Hill and Cox may have adopted the idea of an implied absolute rest frame(again, without the benefit of their paper), implied by the following commentary:

"As a result, the singularity forms a kind of boundary so that all inertial reference frames fall into one of two sets relative to some rest frame: those with a relative velocity less than c, and those with a relative velocity greater than c. The physicists explain that there is no objective way to identify whether a particular reference frame is in the subluminal or in the superluminal set of frames other than by reference to some arbitrary rest frame."
It was of course this "rest frame" that constituted pre-relativistic physics' notion of the aether lumeniferous, a kind of absolute rest frame against which all motion was relative and against which all motion was measured. But Einstein reasoned (if we may put it so baldly and succinctly) that everything we observe is in motion and that the ideas of motion and rest are themselves all relative; there was no absolute rest frame in the sense that had obtained previously. So this aspect of the claim gives me some pause.
That said, however, there are interesting deeper philosophical developments, and I hearken back to the lengthy ongoing dispute between Nikola Tesla - whom I would see as the great 19th and 20th century physicist, and not Einstein - and Albert Einstein. Tesla repeatedly filed patents claiming electro-acoustical waves (or if one prefer, electrical longitudinal waves) with velocities greatly in excess of the velocity of light, as, for example, his patent number 787,412 filed in 1900, which claimed a velocity of 292,830 miles per second. Tesla repeatedly gave interviews to journals and newspapers, long after Einstein's relativity theories had become scientific dogma, claiming that no such speed limit existed. The American physicist Herbert Ives of Bell laboratories entered the fray, claiming the same things. It was, so to speak, Ives and Tesla the engineers, versus Einstein, the theorist.
What Tesla also claimed however was precisely the fact that the phenomena that he was dealing with were longitudinal, and not Hertzian. They were, to put it somewhat differently, stresses in the very space-time with which Einstein was concerned, and hence, the idea presented by Hill and Cox may be an intriguing development... Can their paper rationalize the phenomena recorded by Tesla and others? Time will tell, but if so, then a reconciliation of an old dispute may also be at hand. This possibility also may reconcile other recent developments, such as Albucierre's equations for a warp drive, and more recent developments of that which make the energy requirements to bring about such space-time stresses barely "feasible," and to say "barely feasible" is to open the possibility of engineerability.  For those paying attention, this was basically what Gabriel Kron, another engineer, was saying in 1935.
See you on the flip side.


Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and "strange stuff". His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into "alternative history and science".


  1. HAL838 on October 19, 2012 at 10:03 pm

    Yes, Einstein’s greatest and only achieve-me[a]nt
    was what he called, his greatest blunder.

    THAT is what ties into infinity=zero
    and the true nature of a
    Quantum [Creation] Universe

  2. Jon on October 19, 2012 at 9:45 pm

    I think that Einstein was also used to bury or turn attention away from Whittaker’s papers of 1903 and 1904, which would have also added much more “engineerable” aspects and a very different approach to electromagnetics.

    Using this “greatest scientist of the 20th century” (who was also known to be a plagiarist) to “bury” scientific ideas that were not a part of the “allowed” mainstream physics is a part of the ongoing plan.

    Einstein was not that great a scientist, and most of his best ideas were in reality the work of others. There were certainly other scientists of the day far more capable and productive than he, Tesla and Whittaker, for example.

    There was an obvious and powerful PR machine behind his “crowning” as the ultimate scientist of the century, and that machine continues that “spin” to this day. The same kind of “star building” is true of Edison, who first got the attention of the elite by providing “female companionship” to wealthy train travelers, according to one story. Most of his inventions were simply marketable versions of the work of others, and most of the work in his lab was done by others, usually workers the caliber of Tesla (whom he cheated) and Steinmetz.

    It sends up all kinds of red flags to me when there is that much power behind the creation of popular “stars” like those two. Smells pretty fishy to me.

  3. electrodirector on October 17, 2012 at 5:57 am

    There are quite a few collections of quotes attributed to Saint Albert. If taken in their proper chronological sequence, the picture of the quoter as an old man is quite revealing. Albert knew that his ”fame” couldn’t even last his lifetime. Something the lamestream media must bring up ALL THE TIME – as for example the genius of someone – never was properly implanted in human perception. Claiming that intuitive thinking was the wrong way surely served to convince everybody and their grandfather, provided they didn’t get paychecks from the mass murderers (= Rockefeller and their chosen cohorts) , that there was something seriously wrong with that third-class employee of the Swiss Patent Office in Berne. Remember, he became a ”third-class” employee because he flunked – of all things – the test in math! What a nice coincidence that his girlfriend back then was a student of physics. This also explains some of the mistakes in Albert^s ”higher math”…

    Einstein was an agent who, at the beginning, seemed to believe what he was being paid to put out. Without his conscious knowledge, he belonged to a group of agents let loose to continue the conspiracy’s usual practice: taking over existing institutions such as science, reinventing them according to their sick programming and putting them out as fact, when it is quite obvious that there always are massive moral disconnects at the base. This is normal for brain-washed shills who no longer have emotional intelligence. Freud’s job it was to make pedophilia and homosexuality socially acceptable; let’s note that this beacon of ”sanity” continued to chain-smoke cigars even after half his jaw had been eaten away by cancer. Someone who is unable to learn from his own mistakes does not count as a teacher in my book.

    Saint Albert’s quotes near the end of his shill existence show his fear of being unmasked. I suspect that he was on the verge of spilling the beans to the unwashed masses when Dr Ochsner’s SV-40 got him. The fear present in his quotes is also quite revealing as to the fear-based Tavistock training he might have received.

    Reading the contemporary stuff will yield a crop of paid shills whose aim it always is to, in the end, complicate or stop technological advancement. Darwin, Heaviside, some who allegedly proved Einstein’s theory, Stalin, Trotsky, Lenin, Sebottendorff, Ataturk and his young ”turks”, Eddington, the list is endless.
    These were all connected by some interesting facts in their background, and most of all, they never stop because that’s what they are paid for. They’re still very much at it, at a much faster pace.

    But, as experience tells us, even if a lie is repeated endlessly, human consciousness can tell truth from propaganda in an instant, especially with the known flaws present in all these hoaxes.

    If you want a future, you must invent it in the present or you will not have a future. If something is hampering your development, remove the barrier or go the way of the Dodo bird.

    Looks like some of us are cooked, one way or another.

  4. ILJA on October 17, 2012 at 5:11 am

    A brilliant russian physicyst Gennady Shipov completed the Unified Fied Theory expanding Eintsein’s relativity by fullfiling the latter’s planned great task of geometrization of fundamenthal equations, thus deriving vacuum equations using Ricci’s torsion and following R. Descartes scientific paradigma by 1988 in the USSR.


    • ILJA on October 17, 2012 at 5:24 am

      “In 1988 GENNADY I. SHIPOV had completed his most challenging program of his live –
      «The Program of Universal Relativity and the Theory of Physical Vacuum»

      Within the framework of this program the new physical principle — Principle of Universal Relativity was established.

      Prof. G. Shipov has created the Vacuum Equations, representing set of
      Geometrized Heisenberg equations;
      Geometrized Einstein equations;
      Geometrized Yang-Mills equations,

      They had received the international recognition (Skalsky V., Astrophysics and Space Science., 1990, v 166, p.159.) and were named after the name of the author” -info from the site

  5. HAL838 on October 16, 2012 at 6:21 pm

    Unmoving light [yes, there is]
    is and represents an infinity.
    Faster than light?
    Oops, you missed it.

    Parts of your body actually has the ability to store photons
    [and other strange things]

  6. bdw000 on October 16, 2012 at 4:33 pm

    I am no expert . . . .

    but I remember some real (anti-mainstream) physicists complaining (a long time ago) that calling light waves “transverse” was really not justified. Don’t remember their arguments. Think about it: how could shaking a rope have anything to with with light?????

    Also, no one has ever actually measured that “the speed of light is the same for all observers,” (regardless of motion). Interferometers measure wave relationships between two different beams of light. Differences in speed COULD cause those differences (fringe shifts), but something ELSE might be causing those differences as well. It is absolutely amazing to me that Relativity theory rests on a foundation that has never actually been DIRECTLY verified. It is quite possible that we will never have the technology to actually measure what the speed of light is for differently moving observers, and yet this is all claimed as absolutely certain.


    • bdw000 on October 16, 2012 at 4:37 pm

      There is no doubt that light is something that physics does not completely understand. There are some strange things going on with light.

      I just don’t buy the UVerified claims (that are CLAIMED to be verified) of the relativists.

      Until they can actually verify their claims the way Newton did, I am not impressed.

      • bdw000 on October 16, 2012 at 4:37 pm

        “UVerified” should read “UNverified.”

  7. Robert Barricklow on October 16, 2012 at 3:24 pm

    It is “curious” that Eistein gets ink, And Telsa gets a back pages bttom paragraph. Keep your eyes on the ball(Eistein) while the sleight of hand(“real” science is relegated to a few “insiders”/like zero interest rates)
    keeps the illsion of science & finance as up-to-date. It is up to the speed limit “they” set. Beyond that gate is their community, and it’s a tight knit powerful few. So few, as to be unseen, but their presence is diffently felt/suffered at the masses expense.

  8. Ken Lemon on October 16, 2012 at 1:17 pm

    Yep, it’s all there in “Giza Death Star Destroyed”, for anyone who wants a little more skinny on this subject.

Help the Community Grow

Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.

Upcoming Events