Graduated from the Faculty of General and Applied Physics of the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (1976), Candidate of Physical and Mathematical Sciences (1979) from the Landau Institute for Theoretical Physics.
Do you seriously think that the time has come to revive Umov’s mobile ether and apologize to the defeated students of Stoletov at Moscow State University?
First of all, thank you for visiting the page of the societal Institute for the Study of the Time Problem named after A.P. Levich (chronos.msu.ru). Over 30 years of meetings, a unique collection of papers on little-known approaches to the contradictions between science and practice has been formed there. We never swept the mess under the rug and discussed objectively every hourly report on Tuesdays from 19-00 until the auditorium at the Biological Faculty of Moscow State University is closed. Speakers from other countries are now joining via ZOOM. They even began to practice foreigners’ presentations in English, but discussions are always in our native language and often until 11 pm. We argue, we inevitably make mistakes. Therefore, not everything is posted on the site. If there are ideas for a trial run, then I invite your readers to submit an hour lecture via [email protected]
Now about the thousand-year-old topic of ether, which we also do not avoid. Yes, it is the Platonic continuations of bodies, the Aristotle river-plenum, the Descartes extended matter, the Lomonosov gravitational fluid, and the Umov mobile ether with inertial heat rather than dark matter or auxiliary negative and dark energies, which, in my opinion, must be returned to the educational programs of Moscow State University in all natural science disciplines.
This is not about confusing students with Fatio-Le Sage’s new ultra-light particles or adjustable amers with incomprehensible speeds, but about Plato’s initial idea that ethereal extensions consist of the same substance as other parts of visible bodies. The atheistic definition of matter, which the physicists of the USSR, according to Lenin, were instructed to feel or photograph, was adjusted to please Newton’s empty space, to the non-existent dualism of massive bodies and their supposedly massless fields. However, both the selection of the displayed part of matter above the sensitivity threshold of devices only and the corresponding localization of densities in the dual Newton model are objectively physically contradictory due to the mystical appearance of negative (non-existent) gravitational energies, albeit called potentials.
The plain simplicity of the 1686 “divine thrusts-at-distance” was met with hostility by Huygens and Leibniz, but Newton’s palliative survived by calculating successfully Keplerian orbits in the solar system. But physicists are not theologians or mathematicians, so it is so easy to replace for reality the material ether of the ancient Greeks with Newton’s fictitious potentials based on the religious views of the brilliant Newton or because of the convenience of calculations. Moreover, in the 1930s, quantum mechanics falsified experimentally the pseudoscience of point masses with non-dual field distributions of elementary particles, and hence with field distributions of extended mass in any mechanical system.
My Cartesian publications on the kinetic densities of non-local mass-energy in the Euclidean 3-section of pseudo-Riemannian 4-geometry annoy greatly mathematicians who want to reduce gravity and cosmology in the non-relativistic limit only to Newtonian referents of empty space with metric singularities and saving inclusions of dark matter in “warped vacuum”. I do not think that Hegel made mistake when he saw no reason for mathematicians to introduce spaces without their continuous filling. Plato was the clearest: «Matter and space are one and the same». Fellow mathematicians, have you become smarter than Plato and Hegel with your generalized functions and scientific regalia? I definitely don’t. Therefore, I see no reason to get entangled in the religion of dark forces and Newton’s negative gravitational energies. Let there be at least one who did not shoot.
Have you undertaken any steps to turn the dual physics of particles and fields into an ethereal channel of non-dual space filling?
it is a difficult task for any monk to go against the age-old delusions of believers. The Cartesian critics of the non-existent gravity have no way in Russia today. If you initially deny Newton’s gravity and start something around Lomonosov’s ethereal fluid then supporters of black holes and wormholes will reject the application for a report at RUSGRAV conferences. All gravity organizing committees are tuned according to the camertone of PhysRev authors, and hence members of the RAS. Homegrown dissertations on the ethereal mass-energy of Umov will no longer be accepted by any Higher Attestation Commission (VAK) Council, you know that the first academicians of the USSR smashed doughtily Kasterin, Timiryasev, and all the ethereers of Russian cosmism at Moscow State University. They say that the old country bumpkins are lagging from the fashionable masterpieces of world science, they cannot understand the space compression-curvature of Einstein’s theory and other pearls of Europe’s mathematician prodigies. And Stolypin wagons carried our idealist thinkers to Siberia along with criminals …
My talented postgraduate, who clarified Thomson’s historical problem of “four thirds” due to the (so far not understood by anyone) fundamental difference between Umov’s ethereal vector and Poynting’s radiant energy vector in his articles, received a blocking three in his specialty at FIAN in his third year of study. Having lost his scholarship, the young innovator with five breakthrough publications moved as a programmer to Yandex, since the same ether haters blocked the postgraduate application for the extended grant at Russian Foundation for Basic Research. According to their prejudice, “the rejection of the use of delta functions in favor of the search for a non-dual field distribution of a non-local charge cannot serve as a basis for scientific research.” Whacko! All researchers should sit in Newton’s massless fields and Coulomb’s chargeless fields cabinets that smell naphthalene.
Umov dared at one time to go against the Newtonian dynamics of localized masses in favor of the primacy of the continuous energy transfer and almost failed the thesis defense in 6 hours of debate. The vector was not accepted until 10 years later, Poynting saw his special case. But through the vector motion of the Umov mobile ether energy (1873) renamed many years later into the relativistic rest energy of Einstein, the followers of the inertial ether with heat could describe the macroscopic organization of non-dual matter according to the non-local scenario of quantum mechanics for the convergence of the micro-and macrocosm theories. If both postulates of Special Relativity (1905) formally did not need the support of the ether (although the self-cooling of Umov’s mobile ether is visible in the Lorentz transformations), then after the metric constructions of General Relativity (1916), Einstein became a dedicated supporter of the ether (“ponderable matter”, although did not see its mobility according to Umov).
The ether densities mobility of the rotating Earth as its Platonic continuation is directly evidenced today by the experiment of a counter flight with a quartz clock, similar to the Sagnac effect. And indirect evidence is zero measurements on a stationary Michelson-Morley interferometer when it accompanies the Earth’s surface and its ether. It is the local kinetic pressures of moving ethereal energies and not the mysticism of negative gravitational energies, that should form the basis of inertial matter mechanical theories with the interaction of observed densities (due to non-local stresses of the entire invisible ethereal medium as all single entities) from many hushed up experiments on telekinesis and remote action or vision.
Let me remind you that Einstein’s geodesic of relativistic accelerations at any speed is determined by local metric stresses (of the inertial ether), and not by Newton’s fictitious remote thrusts. Einstein clarified mathematically the mechanism of Lomonosov’s local push by ethereal or metric matter-liquid in the problem of geodesic acceleration of test bodies. General Relativity does not use Newton’s divine thrust-over-distance. If these thrusts (rather than a kinetic phenomenon in the metric self-organization of repulsive densities of a non-local whole) exist in nature, then they have to live with negative mass-energy densities. The dual physics of positive (kinetic) and negative (gravitational) energies is a very dangerous pseudoscience from the Cartesian world of purely kinetic energies point of view and the Russian cosmism monistic ideology about the unity of nature that is based on only positive (observable) energy flows.
Religious adherents of the Newtonian vacuum, point sources, and black holes in the metric consider in turn monistic Cartesians to be pseudoscientists. The domestic academicians not only completed “successfully” the defeat of Russian cosmism and all domestic monists-ethereers in the 1930s, but they are monitoring their Newtonian outposts by the RAS Commission on Pseudoscience even today. Paying tribute to the scientific merits of Lomonosov, Pyotr Kapitsa complained publicly that the lack of Newtonian gravity understanding was just about his only flaw. And it is still dangerous at the institutes of the RAS to declare that far-fetched gravity towards the Earth center does not exist in the non-local phenomenon of falling apples due to the local push of Lomonosov. There is a reason that any jumps behind Newtonian flags have to be published abroad, following the example of Gurvich and Vernadsky. Try to test the Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics or Advances in Physical Sciences by criticizing Newton’s theory or relativistic gravity from PhysRev. Have you ever wondered why the raw materials superpower does not have funds not only for the development of independent scientific journals but even for the Russian-language analog of the electronic archive arXiv.org? I warned the Civic Chamber at the hearings of the university ranking program that had been thrown out that the departed train could not be caught up along their old track when I was Vice-Rector of the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology Back in 2012. But it is necessary to cut off the path 20-30 years ahead, as the aircraft designer Bartini did. Well, at least they listened to transform data collection for ranking into a competitiveness program, but all the same, universities drove along someone else’s track. And what does impunity for the temples, universities, and scientific schools destruction lead to?
And what do you see as a useful way out of the forced development of Umov-Einstein ether physics across the generally accepted mainstream of black holes?
Russian cosmism is not just a spatial ether philosophy, but a guide to the explanation and control of reversible transformations of ethereal and thermal energy flows. Umov’s mobile ether can provide many new technologies in addition to the uncontrolled extraction of ether content into a nuclear explosion heat. It can clarify, for example, the alternative medicine mechanisms, bring hypnosis, telepathy, and remote vision to the level of quantitative verification of predictable processes, and much more on the omnipresent exchange of energy and information in non-local self-organization of matter-space. Telekinesis, non-contact wrestling, levitation, and “supportless” mechanisms of vortex motion in a non-local distribution of mass-energy (like EmDrive) are the simplest proposals from ethereers, for which they can not only be removed from the academic council but dismissed from the institute also.
Understanding the ether potential for electrical technologies, Thomson, Lorentz, Abraham, Poincaré, Umov, Lebedev, Kasterin, Schwinger, Feynman, and many others have been trying so hard to build a theory of the extended electron since the elementary charge discovery (1897) in cathode rays. Everything comes down here on the solution of the Poincaré internal pressure hypothesis, which presumably compensates for the Coulomb repulsion of radial densities («Thomson 4/3 problem leads to nonlocal continuous charges with Poincaré radial stresses and zero electromagnetic inertia»). The electron is modeled in classical electrodynamics until now by a point singularity or a delta function, which Louis de Broglie called rightly an intellectual failure.
There is the Institute of Gustav Mie in Germany, who, even before the era of quantum particle density distributions, found a way to describe numerically field matter or soliton charge based on Maxwell’s equations. Support for the work of Mie and this Institute indicates that PhysRev could not fool the Germans with its fairy tales about black holes. Moreover, Einstein disavowed Schwarzschild singularities in 1939 and stopped publishing in PhysRev forever. The undercover race to the unfinished theory of the extended electron and breakthrough ethereal technologies is going according to the hidden scenario of the uranium project. I admire the Anglo-Saxons, our scientists have to first publish everything new abroad in English and wait for the ideas of underestimated Russian cosmists, including Lomonosov, Umov, Tsiolkovsky, Gurvich, Roerich, Vernadsky, Chizhevsky, Timiryasev, Florensky, Kozyrev, Veynik, Losev, Shnol, and many others to return home. It’s time for Russians to understand finally at least the general thoughts of the ethereal monist Tsiolkovsky that each of us (extended, ethereal) is an inhabitant of the all-one universe and not a small planet Earth. And the Pricewaterhouse managers and their accomplices have to be put out of the self-sufficient system of Russian education and science. Then continuous charges will be able to “serve as the basis for scientific research” in our country again as in the Gustav Mie case in Germany.
Remember how A.A. Logunov was attacked from everywhere for attempting to return to the Euclidean space only. I became interested in his thoughts then. Even though Logunov remained in dual physics and did not go towards a non-dual ether, as Einstein and Infeld advised in 1939, but because he argued about the need for universal geometry for relativistic momentum transfer, I began to obtain flat 3-sections of curved space-time only for extended masses from the beginning of the 90s. All anti-Schwarschild metrics were rejected and laughed at by reviewers then. And astrophysicists confirmed the Euclidean nature of space in a series of balloon experiments in 1999, but the religion of the curved emptiness changed its shoes on the go immediately.
Our editors still dismiss metrics with Euclidean 3-space as being of no interest to the journal, i.e. bypassing the VAK rules on peer review. PhysRev itself does not behave like this. At first, a theoretician began to teach me that the Schwarzschild metric is unique for General Relativity because of the Birkhoff theorem and therefore the interaction space is always curved. When I retorted that this theorem is for empty space only and I have metric solutions for spatial filling with extended masses, then the matter was transferred further to the experimenters. They answered didactically the Russian ignoramus that the Schwarzschild distortions of the metric have been very well verified experimentally and there is nothing more to discuss here. Of course, I advised them to read Karl Popper that experiments never confirm a theory, but can falsify it only. And I added that where they measured, all the effects of GR with point and extended sources give indistinguishable relativistic corrections to Newton’s dynamics. They did not publish of course. After all, tests worth billions cannot be stopped by Popper’s German logic or the ethereal filling of Russians instead of their empty curvature-nurse.
I began to give the first course of lectures on General Relativity abroad at the request of my magnetism class. I became convinced at the same time that metric GR is a monistic geometrization of extended mass energy with only positive densities. The kinetic energy monism should not be reduced in the nonrelativistic limit to the Newtonian dualism of point sources and their gravity fields. See for yourself. There was only one kinetic energy-momentum 4-vector with scalar convolution in Special Relativity. But even in General Relativity, Einstein left only one 4-vector of energy-momentum with the same scalar convolution for a particle. That is Einstein did not introduce the gravitational energy-momentum of a body as a new entity in metric physics. Its metric changes non-uniformly only the relativistic kinetic energy of bodies, which remains positive in any field. Therefore, Einstein’s metric physics is a monistic theory of the kinetic energy spatial transfer and is by no means reducible to Newton’s dual theory. Remember Kuhn: “Einstein’s theory should only be accepted as correct if Newton’s is incorrect.”
The introduction of the gravity concept for the motion geodesics in General Relativity is not required at all, but it is a historical tribute to Newtonian referents in the centuries-old interpretation of the accelerated motion of inertial densities. Monistic geometrization of kinetic energies or GR with material ether is more appropriate to call metric inertia, rather than metric gravity. The monistic energy non-local all-unity in the Russian cosmists teachings involves the mutual transformation of the observed (thermal, external) and unobservable (ethereal, internal) fractions of kinetic energy in the Umov vector and, for example, in an atomic explosion. The competition of thermal and ethereal fractions of monistic kinetic energy with an equal distribution over external and internal degrees of freedom is responsible for the mutual attraction of bodies in low densities and geodesic repulsion in superstrong ones. It is responsible for the cyclic fluctuations of the observed cosmic distributions around the equilibrium profiles for thermal densities also (Gravitational attraction until relativistic equipartition of internal and translational kinetic energies). Such a monistic theory for the self-organization of distributed kinetic energy through correlated tensions of metric space-time over the entire 3-volume of non-local mass-energy maintains Kant’s stable cosmology and Nietzsche’s “eternal return of the same” in the absence of dissipation acts. Or do you think that both philosophers were joking and that a stone thrown vertically at the field center of mass will not return to you along the Kepler degenerate trajectory?
So far, this is all close to philosophy, but will there be a technological breakthrough from replacing Newton’s gravity with Lomonosov’s monistic ethereal nudge physics?
We would have had everything long ago, including non-local mechanical motion principles and controlled melt densities self-organization in a blast furnace. Nothing worthwhile was expected at first in Germany from the transition to the quantum paradigm and the Schrödinger equation for the railway industry and aviation, which was reviving at that time. I see demand for the ideas of Russian cosmism with Umov’s ethereal physics and extended sources in Einstein’s GR not from my employers (where everything is fine anyway), but in distant India and China. Many were shaken up by my mathematical invasion of yin-yang energy, where Newton’s fictitious potentials fell rightly into the non-material Yin-replica from the Yang kinetic reality («Cartesian Material Space with Active-Passive Densities of Complex Charges and Yin-Yang Compensation of Energy Integrals»).
Maybe this is a waste of time, but I wrote on request a couple of chapters in their books for physicists (Relativistic Tests do not Falsify Euclidean 3-geometry of Continuous Space-matter) and chemists (4D Quantization of Metric Matter-space-time in Steady Chemical Structures). Maybe I’ll send the Hindus a textbook of my lectures on the non-local charges electrodynamics («Pure field electrodynamics of continuous complex charges») since continuous charges cannot serve as a basis for research in Russia. Let postgraduates get out of the teachers’ intellectual failure at least there.
I did not expect it, but overseas NOVA asked also why Newton and Euler did not please Lomonosov and other Russians. I wrote intricately because I thought a direct rebuff to Newton would not be published in New York («Kinetic Monism and All-Unity in Russian Cosmism versus Newtonian Dualism of Separated Energies»). This is because the unsinkability of Newtonian mechanics in its domain of applicability is overstated greatly. Vector mechanics is good only for fixed integrals of masses (bodies) under the action of external forces integrals. However, the applied forces and local accelerations vector collinearity is violated always in an ideal fluid due to its tensor self-organization with non-Newtonian feedback self-accelerations. These turbulent accelerations arise due to the non-local nature of the energy, impetus, and angular momentum conserved integrals of the entire material system. Well, if, according to Plato, matter and space are the same, then for Newtonian physics there is no scope at all for the real world of non-locally distributed mass-energy Euler’s introduction of point masses for the far-fetched application of Newtonian accelerations to small fluid elements fooled not only Navier and Stokes but entire generations of designers. The vortex fluid flows in the hydropower station’s rotors are not decelerated according to Newton’s laws, but generate auto wave oscillations with redistribution of kinetic energy over all available degrees of freedom, up to splitting into toroidal Taylor vortices. I see the Euler / Navier-Stokes equation modification with higher derivatives for non-Newtonian accelerations through the Einstein formalism for the ether metric inertia («Metric inertia for eddy densities of nonlocal matter-space»). Here I expect that ether physics will not only help specialists to verify the predicted numerically non-Newtonian pressure across the gas-dynamic flow in a jet engine or tokamak, but also change the instructions for the energy safe extraction from vortex hydraulic structures.
As for the of the ether corrections smallness from the source length in comparison with the delta distribution, then, in the first order in the small Cavendish constant, the pushing in the ether, as already mentioned, does not differ from the relativistic attraction for a model emptiness without ether. However, the mechanical ether presence restores the material space Euclidean nature and meets the quantum mechanics and electrodynamics requirements. More importantly, in the non-Newtonian self-accelerations metric organization, the ether inertia depends on the reciprocal of the Cavendish constant, which is large. This makes it possible to test the metric inertia theory and the turbulent disturbances non-local nature in simple laboratory tests. There are a lot of modified Euler equation applications with ether viscosity on the opened path of combining gas dynamics-hydrodynamics and electrodynamics. I will not recount everything, but this is precisely what the professor of Moscow State University N.P. Kasterin done to the world was doing in 1938. As I see now the task turned out to be difficult and then he failed to solve it. Everyone around did not help but criticized only. But Kasterin formulated the need for the unification of mechanical (gas-dynamic) and electromagnetic motions of field energy before Hilbert. Hilbert did not implement his 1915 physics unification program also. Why was he elevated rather than fired from the university for a partial failure?
We shall talk about the reasons for the etherers defeat and ethics in the academic environment next time. After such an open interview, many will want to throw a stone at me even though for denying Newton’s gravity only. They cannot allow anyone in Moscow to believe once again in the triumph of Lomonosov’s local pressure in the non-locally organized ether. I think that it is impossible to fool the Russians with the model emptiness of the cosmos, especially schoolchildren and students. The dark forces, black holes, fictitious gravity, and flawed hydrodynamics propagandists devalue domestic science with Western delusions. It’s time for such propagandists to apologize to the country’s taxpayers and the defamed etherers of Russian cosmism.
Interview: Ivan Stepanyan