Essay Abstract

According to modern scientific knowledge, an absolute vacuum is not obtainable. Quantum theory sets limits for the best possible quality of vacuum, predicting that no volume of space can be perfectly empty. In spite of the fact that the technology of creation of "perfect vacuum" is fundamentally forbidden, I can prove it may ultimately be allowed, by physics. Paper shows how to create and detect the absolute vacuum (it is void of particles, radiation, neutrino, virtual particles, zero point fluctuations, and void of space-time!). Intuitively, a vacuum is what is left when all matter is removed from a region. It is shown that depending on the speed we remove the matter, we can obtain a Torricelli's vacuum or a Descartes' absolute vacuum. Since gravitation and neutrino cannot be shielded, there is no way to make a perfectly isolated system. The absolute vacuum allows us to shield even gravitation and neutrinos and teleport matter at distance 13 billions light years. There are testable consequences for the absolute vacuum theory.

Author Bio

Born in Ghindesti, Moldova, November 5, 1964. Leshan's research interests are hole teleportation, cosmology and particle physics.

Download Essay PDF File

a month later

  • [deleted]

  • Post #2

I belive the hole teleportation idea is ingenious because even though it involves curving space like a black hole doesn't mean using enough energy to power New York for 20 years. In fact, for all intents and purposes, this system uses low levels of energy.

The beauty of this space curving is NO EXOTIC MATTER, which means no messing around with hypothetical methods of creating the stuff. This system has great potential and sounds both reasonable and practical - sit inside a capsule, teleport to other side of the planet or the solar system in moments. No breaking the body down to molecules.

Think about it.

4 days later

Dear Anonymous,

Thank you for support; I have some original ideas how to create the hole generator and obtain holes on the surface of solid films. But I need a laboratory and financial support. For example, there is need in two atomic (cesium) clocks in order to detect the source of holes.

Dear FQXi community,

I propose that each author of essay should review and check for consistency all FQXi essays. It would engage authors in critical logical analyses of essays and discussion. This information could help us to find the best essay by comparing the merits and demerits of each essay, in order to exclude fraud. Otherwise a swindler would obtain the FQXi prize. Imagine that one author have about 50 accomplices and friends. Then all its accomplices and friends vote for given author to increase its ratings. In such a way a swindler may have the best ratings and may obtain a FQXi prize.

The review of essay must answer the following questions:

Is the essay logic? Does a theory contain the logical errors?

Does an essay contain the new physical ideas? Does an essay have any scientific value?

My essay also needs a review; please check for logic and consistency my essay. I know about grammatical and random errors, but you search my essay for logical errors please. In turn, I'll check for logic and consistency all the FQXi essays published here.

11 days later

  • [deleted]

  • Post #4

Hi Leshan ,

It's a beautiful extrapolation.

About the logic ,I beleive what the imaginaries are inserted like the rule of holes and vaccum thus the conclusion about the mass is not correct for me ,the mass ,the gravity needs a more basic cause .

The gravitation ,the mass is the effect of a cause ,a physical cause ,for me the rotations of quantum spheres .

Thus if the imaginaries are not correlated with the physicality thus the experiment and its theory needs limits to have logic results .

The idea is good in correlation with the Descartes and tori.vaccuum ,absolute .

What this experiment needs is the thermodynamic and a cause of the gravitation .I don't see an other solution than the rotating spheres .Now at this scale ,the holes for me are the lattices of the specific entanglement of quantum spheres ,and thus their geometry is different than in your extrapolation .I don't see others holes in stable models or experiments.The nature of this space between spheres is probably a balance and a necessity to rotate ,of course it's my interpretation .The gravitation ,the mass can appear due to these rotations thus .A spherical hole is different and in our imagination it seems to me .

With the thermodynamic ;the extrapolations are linked with the laws .

,could you tell me more about these vaccuums and holes please ?

Sincerely

Steve

  • [deleted]

  • Post #5

Hi Steave,

'could you tell me more about these vacuums and holes please'

To create an absolute vacuum (a hole in space-time) you must remove all the matter from a given volume very quickly (instantly). After that a hole appear for a very short time ~ 10^-24 s. The lifetime of holes is very short because holes are 'filled quickly by the environment.

To remove all matter from a given volume we can use some nuclear processes, for example the decay of free neutrons.

If the free neutron decays, it disappears instantly. Then you see the products of its decay - proton, electron and antineutrino, but you know nothing about these processes. Since we removed all matter (a neutron) from volume instantly, a hole in spacetime must appear for a short time 10^-24 s.

It is a theory that allows experimental verification; if the clocks placed near the neutron storage runs slower, it will be the experimental proof for the hole theory.

Best regards,

Constantin

  • [deleted]

  • Post #6

Hi dear Constantin,

Thanks .

Thus This short instant returns to its balance in fact ,it's very short that .

Difficult experiment I think .

If we apply variables, the pression or the temperature, in a finite volume ,it's probably more easy No ?

Steve

  • [deleted]

  • Post #7

Leshan,

". Imagine a closed volume with a body inside. Then we envelope a body with absolute isolation. How you compare now the inertial and gravitational mass? You do not have access to this volume because it is an AVSOLUTE isolation, that shield all the fields including gravitation. It is equivalent to sending a body in another universe.

Since you cannot compare the inertial and gravitational mass, you cannot speak about violation of EP. "

This is not a valid argument. Suppose I am "proving" the sum of the angles in a flat triangle is 245 degrees instead of 180, and someone finds the mistakes in my "proof" and writes it on a piece of paper. Just because I am closing my eyes every time I am attempting to read it, it does not mean the mistake is not real.

So what you need to do in your case is to include an experimentalist with its measuring tools inside your absolutely isolated region. The local observer should see a violation of the EP. If the region is not macroscopic, then we should still be able to see measurement consequences one way or another. Shielding gravity means shielding the gravitational charge which in effect no longer equals the inertial mass and you do get an EP violation.

About QCD, and QED, they are very similar: you have the same mathematical machinery, it is only that one is based on SU(3) while the other is based on U(1)XSU(2). They therefore come as a "package deal" if one is bad, so is the other. The only thing you can question for QCD is the SU(3), but we have solid experimental evidence for this.

I invite all readers to search for errors in my theory. Since hole vacuum theory allows gravity shielding, Florin Moldoveanu suspects the violation of Equivalence principle in my theory.

According to Wikipedia, the term 'gravitational shielding' refers to a hypothetical process of shielding an object from the influence of a gravitational field. Such processes, if they existed, would have the effect of reducing the weight of an object. The shape of the shielded region would be similar to a shadow from the gravitational shield. For example, the shape of the shielded region above a disk would be conical. The height of the cone's apex above the disk would vary directly with the height of the shielding disk above the earth. Also, gravitational shielding would be a violation of the equivalence principle and therefore inconsistent with both Newtonian theory and general relativity.

First, let us describe my gravity shielding device. All fundamental fields are able to propagate through space-time only and cannot propagate outside of space-time continuum. Therefore, in order to create an obstacle for gravitation, we must create a hole in space-time (a discontinuous space-time). It will be the ideal isolation able to shield even gravitation, because fundamental interactions cannot propagate outside of space-time.

Thus I propose to envelop a body with a very thin layer of holes in space-time (or absolute vacuum) in order to shield gravity. These holes have lifetimes of order 10^-24 s because holes are filled quickly by environment.

Florin, I have many variants to reply you, but I selected the most short and convincing arguments:

Let the experimentalist test the equivalence principle. Then we envelop the experimentalist with a closed hole surface able to shield gravitation. It causes teleportation of experimentalist. According to hole teleportation laws, the start and finish places must have the same characteristics of the force fields. It means that experimentalists must reappear in the same gravitational field. Pay attention that during the time of gravity shielding, the external observer will see the free falling of closed hole surface with experimentalist inside. Please read the property of holes number 5 from my essay: artificially created holes free falls in a gravitational field. Holes are immobile concerning the inertial frame of birth. Consequently, if a free falling observer creates a hole in space-time, both hole and observer free fall similarly.

Therefore, no EP violation can detect your experimentalist. He disappears and reappears in the same gravitational field. The closed hole surface free falls during its short time of existence.

Also the gravity shielding device does not create the effect of reducing the weight of an object because

a) The hole surface free fall in a gravitational field;

b) The lifetime of gravity shielding surface is very short 10^-24 s; We can compare it with the lifetime of virtual particles that appear and disappear in empty space. Quantum mechanics allows the fluctuation of mass, energy ets. during that short time.

'This is not a valid argument. Suppose I am 'proving' the sum of the angles in a flat triangle is 245 degrees instead of 180, and someone finds the mistakes in my 'proof' and writes it on a piece of paper. Just because I am closing my eyes every time I am attempting to read it, it does not mean the mistake is not real.

Florin, it is not a good example. If you envelop your triangle and paper with a closed hole surface, you can forget about your things, you never see again them. Because your triangle will be teleported at distance 1 - 1000 light years.

Dr. Gorda published his nervous post as a reply to my critique of his essay. Why all physicists are afraid of criticism?

'please, kindly demonstrate your statements with mathematical formulas'

No problems, I can demonstrate you my hole theory with mathematical formulas. But please pay attention at FQXi rules: Essay should be 'Accessible to a diverse, highly-educated but non-specialist audience, aiming in the range between the level of Scientific American and a review article in Science or Nature. Thus FQXi ask to avoid formulas and special definitions. Therefore I strongly suggest you to withdraw your essay from this FQXi Essay Contest because the most part of your essay contain formulas and special definitions only. Your essay is very difficult for usual readers. Your essay violates the FQXi rules: the entry should differ substantially from any previously published piece by the author. Your essay do not differ substantially from your previously published paper.

It is the main cause why my essay contain two formulas only. The usual readers easy understand a simple logic without formulas. Do you think my essay must contain formulas and definitions only?

Now my hole theory of gravitation is under publication in peer reviewed journal. For your information, my hole theory of gravitation was verified by Soros foundation and some Universities. You are not able to find any error here. You can publish only notes like 'no mathematical formulas' The presence of mathematical formulas is not a proof that the theory is true. It is the main cause why you don't registered gravitational waves till now. Because your theory is a mathematical model mainly.

'There are not mathematical proofs on the statements of Mr. Leshan in is essay'

You see, Dr. Corda have found a sole note in my essay - 'no mathematical proofs'. Dr. Corda, the presence or absence of mathematics is not a proof that the theory is true or false. I can show you a lot of mathematical papers that are erroneous. For example the wormhole theory has a beautiful mathematics but I found the logical errors in this theory: the open tunnel paradox. Gravitating bodies can interact through wormholes and it violates the energy conservation laws. I can research physics and find errors in your theory without using mathematics in general. The mathematics use a mathematical logic and my research method use the usual logic. My theory has a VERY STRONG LOGIC. You are not able to the find logical errors in my theory.

I can prove experimentally my theory therefore I do not need any 'mathematical proofs'.

I predict for you that the Standard Model will fall during next 20 years because it is a mathematical model only. You can compute anything and explain nothing. The main cause is your statement 'no mathematical proofs'. The physics must be governed by PHYSICS and LOGIC. I can research physics and find errors in your theory using logic only and without using mathematics in general. We need a new research method to create a new physics.

'I also invite you to look for the name of Mr. Leshan in SPIRES or arXiv.org: THERE ARE NOT PAPERS OF MR LESHAN PUBLISHED BY INTERNATIONAL PEER-REVIEWED JOURNALS'.

Because some editors rejects all papers that do not fit dogmas. For example I sent a paper 'The radius of hole teleportation and quantum teleportation is limited by Hubble sphere' to 'Classical and quantum gravity' and UFJ. The paper was rejected because 'bodies cannot move faster that light'. My theory allows faster than light teleportation of matter therefore all my papers are rejected by peer reviewed journals. In the same way ancient inquisition pursued Bruno and Kopernik. One journal rejected my theory because 'vacuum holes are too unusual'. It is the persecution of dissidents. The modern inquisition rejects all papers that do not fit dogmas. Another cause is that English is not my native language therefore my text is not clear.

Now this 'rejected' article is very known. Please write 'radius teleportation' in Google. This rejected article heads the search list.

Dear Community,

I created my theory using a strong logically deductive reasoning. My theory does not contain the arbitrary postulates. Every proposition, every idea follows logically from the previous proposition. My theory is like a brick wall, every idea and proposition supports one another. Therefore I'm sure that my theory is true and I can prove it experimentally. I do not need mathematics to prove my theory. You know that physics is governed by experiment. I need two atomic clocks only to prove EXPERIMENTALLY my theory. You know that the usual Torricelli's vacuum (a TV kinescope) is not able to slow down time. Now I can create an absolute vacuum in the chamber and a time dilation effect must appear! It is the proof that I created a new kind of vacuum - the absolute vacuum. The Torricelli's vacuum is not able to slow down time! Therefore the appearance of time dilation effect is a true proof for the vacuum holes. I can show all experimental signs for vacuum holes - the appearance of time dilation and length contraction effects. I can show you experimentally how the Descartes's vessel collapses. Thus, I can prove experimentally my theory without 'mathematical proofs'.

It was the 'macroscopic' explanation. Really I use the nuclear physics and quantum mechanics to create an absolute vacuum. The vacuum is was it left when all matter is removed very quickly from the chamber. To remove all the matter very quickly from the given volume I propose to use the inelastic scattering, annihilation and decays. For example, we can remove very quickly a matter (a particle) from given volume using inelastic scattering.

If a particle with near-luminal speed strikes another particle, one leaves 'its volume' at near-luminal speed. In this way we removed all matter very quickly and a hole in space-time must appear. Therefore, to prove my theory I need two clocks only.

If the clocks placed in region of inelastic scattering (in LHC collider) tick slower than another control clocks, it will be the experimental proof for my theory. Also I can show experimentally other experimental signs for the vacuum holes, therefore I do not need any 'mathematical proofs'.

Dear Constantin Zaharia Leshan

I think Descartes is right. If we consider the Universe as Cosmic-matrix in fluidity, we may not able to create absolute vacuum as space is only the extension of matter in which there is embedded gravity that is tensor. Space cell cannot disappear in zero time and could be oscillation of clocks that is fluctuation of space cell.

With best regards,

Jayakar

  • [deleted]

  • Post #12

Leshan,

You are "curing" the EP violation with something even worse, a violation of the speed of light. The teleportation argument looks like a rabbit out of a hat trick, and 1. it is not convincing (I did not see any concrete mechanism for how it would happen in your essay) and 2. it will violate a basic rule of relativity of not being able to transmit information faster than the speed of light. If your teleportation would happen slower than the speed of light, then you cannot outrun the gravitational waves resulting in an EP violation yet again.

PS: I see in ouf of your posts above: "The paper was rejected because 'bodies cannot move faster that light'. My theory allows faster than light teleportation of matter therefore all my papers are rejected by peer reviewed journals." This is a very valid answer from the journals, as all experiments so far had upheld this. The very first repeatable experiment where this will be proven false, will surely get the Nobel prize. But do not hold your breath for it, because it will never happen.

Florin,

'You are "curing" the EP violation with something even worse, a violation of the speed of light'

1. OK, Florin, I can prove the absence of EP violation in my theory without using faster than light teleportation. If we create the closed hole surface, both internal and external observer see this hole surface only, but not teleportation. Therefore I do not need to involve teleportation in this discussion about EP violation.

There is no EP violation in hole theory because:

a) The closed hole surface exist a short time 10^-24s only. Quantum mechanics allows the fluctuation of mass/energy during that short time.

b) My gravity shielding devise does not create the effect of reducing the weight of an object because the hole surface free fall in a gravitational field. Do you have any questions?

'This is a very valid answer from the journals, as all experiments so far had upheld this. The very first repeatable experiment where this will be proven false will surely get the Nobel prize. But do not hold your breath for it, because it will never happen'

1. Florin, I prepare experiments for faster than light teleportation of matter. We must envelop a body (particle) with a closed hole surface. I'll propose the teleportation experiments for LHC collider.

2. I found a way how to introduce my FTL hole teleportation in mainstream physics. My hole teleportation has the same mechanism as Alcubierre Warp drive, it is a FTL motion of the bubble of space-time. Physics allows the motion of the bubble of space-time faster than light. Therefore now all my papers about teleportation use the same argument: since physics allows the Alcubierre drive, consequently physics must allow also hole teleportation because HT use the same mechanism. I cut a volume (bubble) of space and this bubble of spacetime moves faster than light from place A to place B. Do you have any questions?

Now the mainstream physics must allow Hole teleportation. Soon you'll see Hole teleportation in all official textbooks. Now all my papers about hole teleportation use this argument about similarity with Alcubierre Warp drive.

Of all the essays my theory contain the best 'new frontiers and innovative ideas integral to a deep understanding of reality, but unlikely to be supported by conventional funding sources' [FQXi]. Therefore I hope FQXi will support my theory. It is logical theory that allows experimental testing.

  • [deleted]

  • Post #14

a) The closed hole surface exist a short time 10^-24s only. Quantum mechanics allows the fluctuation of mass/energy during that short time.

b) My gravity shielding devise does not create the effect of reducing the weight of an object because the hole surface free fall in a gravitational field. Do you have any questions?

(a) is irrelevant as long as the time is not zero.

(b) The sentence is unclear.

"I'll propose the teleportation experiments for LHC collider."

Do you even know what the center of mass collision energy at LHC is? Why do you need this, why not use some less powerful accelerators? And why do you delude yourself of thinking your experiment has any remote chance to be accepted? LHC is a very serious and expensive business and you probably will have a better chance of being accepted as the first astronaut on a Mars mission than this.

"My hole teleportation has the same mechanism as Alcubierre Warp drive, it is a FTL motion of the bubble of space-time."

Sorry to disappoint again, warp drives work only in Star Trek, but all time travel solutions of general relativity are ALL unphysical (and this is mathematically provable).

Florin

'is irrelevant as long as the time is not zero'

Virtual particles appear from nothing and disappear. Thus quantum mechanics allow the fluctuation of mass/energy during a short time. For a very short time, the uncertainty in the energy can be large. The Closed hole surface is the same fluctuation of mass during a very short time. Do virtual particles violate the Equivalence Principle? In the same way my closed hole surface cannot violate EP. It is a concept very similar to virtual particles. Both phenomena are based on uncertainty principle. I published a paper 'Heisenberg compensator, teleportation as wave-particle duality' (in Russian) that hole teleportation is a macroscopic quantum mechanical phenomenon.

Virtual particles 'can be considered a manifestation of quantum tunneling' [Wikipedia]. My closed hole surface also is a manifestation of quantum tunneling - hole teleportation.

'The sentence is unclear'. Florin, you cannot use the hole surface to reduce the weight of objects because CHS free fall. To reduce the weight of objects, you need a gravity shielding surface able to stay fixed above the surface of Earth during a long time. Unfortunately the hole surface free fall and exist a very short time only. If you create a hole surface between a body and Earth then both body and hole surface free fall similarly, therefore no effect of reducing the weight can appear. The gravity shielding effect appear for objects inside of closed hole surface for a very short time only. Another obstacle is that you cannot enter into a CHS, you do not have access to the shielded body. Since you can't compare the gravitational and inertial mass, then you can't speak about EP violation. Another cause is that the lifetime of CHS is very short. Quantum mechanics allow fluctuation of mass during a very short time. All these effects prevent the violation of equivalence principle in hole vacuum theory.

'And why do you delude yourself of thinking your experiment has any remote chance to be accepted?

LHC is a very serious and expensive business, therefore LHC look for the most important and fundamental experiments only. The faster than light teleportation of matter is the most important, fundamental and advantageous experiment ever. It allows teleportation of matter at distance 13 billions light years. Teleportation of matter allow us to explore and colonize the most distant planets and stars. It opens a new physics. Therefore this experiment is the most important. I need LHC because it is able to create a very large holes in space-time. On the other hand, I can use also the less powerful accelerators for first experiments? For this purpose I must create the convincing teleportation experiments.

'Sorry to disappoint again, warp drives work only in Star Trek'

The Alcubierre Warp drive is a concept accepted by scientific community. There are a lot of papers about AWD published in Class. Quantum Grav, Physical Review D, 'Although Special Relativity forbids objects to move faster than light within space-time, it is unknown how fast space-time itself can move'. Outside of Hubble sphere galaxies 'move' faster than light, but it is expansion of space-time. Therefore a bubble of space-time can 'move' faster than light outside of Hubble sphere, it is motion of space-time itself. Hole teleportation use the same mechanism - it is FTL motion of a bubble of space-time.

Thus, Hole teleportation will be accepted by scientific community in the same way as Alcubierre Warp drive and superluminal galaxies. Superluminal galaxies are the experimental proofs for hole teleportation. I use the same mechanism.

  • [deleted]

  • Post #16

"Do virtual particles violate the Equivalence Principle?"

No, because virtual particles are Feynman diagrams, mere pencil marks on paper. Virtual particles violate all sorts of things, including traveling back in time, but collectively after summing all terms the overall theory is well behaved.

If your theory resembles virtual particles, you have to rigorously establish your perturbation theory rules. Yang-Mills theories were not taken seriously until their renormalization was rigorously proved. Same thing with superstring theory.

"Florin, you cannot use the hole surface to reduce the weight of objects because CHS free fall."

So if I free fall with an elevator, EP is not valid??? A co-falling experimenter can detect EP violations it there are any.

"Another cause is that the lifetime of CHS is very short. Quantum mechanics allow fluctuation of mass during a very short time. All these effects prevent the violation of equivalence principle in hole vacuum theory."

So do you have a sensible quantum gravity theory where you can prove that because the lifetime is short, no EP violation does occur? Nobody has this theory yet and therefore this is not an explanation, it is only a speculation.

"LHC is a very serious and expensive business, therefore LHC look for the most important and fundamental experiments only. The faster than light teleportation of matter is the most important, fundamental and advantageous experiment ever. "

LHC is looking at supersymmetry, Higgs, large extra dimensions, and other extensions to the standard model. The accelerator himself uses relativity theory to a very large and precise degree to accelerate the particles. To propose something that violates relativity while the accelerator itself is build on it is nonsense and it will never be approved.

"The Alcubierre Warp drive is a concept accepted by scientific community."

Not by me (and by the majority of the physics community - I am not alone in this).

"There are a lot of papers about AWD published in Class. Quantum Grav, Physical Review D"

The only reason for that is that those time travel (or faster than light) solutions are exact solutions of general relativity. But they run into other problems with both quantum and classical mechanics.

"Superluminal galaxies are the experimental proofs for hole teleportation. I use the same mechanism."

Do I even need to comment on this?

Florin,

'So if I free fall with an elevator, EP is not valid??? A co-falling experimenter can detect EP violations it there are any'

Florin, please attend to words! In order to write critique, you invent your own imaginary arguments. Please criticize my arguments but not yours. I wrote you about the reducing of weight effect at free falling but not EP violation. If you free fall on elevator then the effect of reducing weight cannot appear because CHS free fall and exist a short time only. The EP violation is prevented in my theory by all these collectively effects:

a) You cannot have access to CHS to compare the inertial and gravitational mass; since you can't compare the inertial and gravitational mass, you can't speak about EP violation;

b) The lifetime of the closed hole surface is very short;

c) The CHS free fall;

d) the hole surface is a independent source of gravitation;

Also pay attention that the EP is a 'built-in' effect in my theory; The gravitation appear because of hole emission (bodies interact with holes). And the inertia also appears because bodies interact with holes. Therefore, the Equivalence effect is a 'built-in' effect in my theory. Therefore it is impossible to find EP violation in my theory, since both gravitational and inertial mass appear at interaction with holes.

'To propose something that violates relativity while the accelerator itself is build on it is nonsense and it will never be approved'

My theory does not violate relativity. My gravitation theory shows gravitation as the curvature of space-time. The holes are able to create time dilation and length contraction effects. My theory also confirms that the speed of motion IN SPACE is limited by the speed of light c (My essay use the limit of speed c). 'Although Special Relativity forbids objects to move faster than light within space-time, it is unknown how fast space-time itself can move' Thus my theory allows for a bubble of space-time to move FTL. It does not violate relativity. Thus my theory is compatible with relativity!

'LHC is looking at supersymmetry, Higgs, large extra dimensions, and other extensions to the standard model'

My experiments do not eliminate other experiments. Let the LHC look for Higgs. Then I ask scientists to place atomic clocks near the inelastic scattering zone. The appearance of time dilation effects will be a proof for existence of vacuum holes. Then I can show all experimental signs for vacuum holes in the same way. After demonstration of reality of holes I'll propose a short and convincing experiment for teleportation of matter. Also I can use the less powerful accelerators. The LHC is needed for final experiments only.

'Do I even need to comment on this? (about superluminal galaxies). Now I understand why you ignore the Alcubierre Warp drive and FTL effects. You think with mathematical abstractions only. (No, because virtual particles are Feynman diagrams). To discover something important you need to think logically in physics. The Virtual particles are the real phenomenon, not a mathematical abstraction.

Florin, outside of Hubble sphere the recession velocities of galaxies are greater than the speed of light. It does not violate relativity because it is not FTL motion of matter; it is motion (expansion) of space-time itself. The Alcubierre Warp drive and Hole teleportation use the same effects.

We cannot create new FTL physics using dogmas. The new physics must consider EXPERIMENTAL DATA only, but not old theories or mathematical abstractions and diagrams. We do not write holly papers, all theories have errors. The experimental data only is true information. Our dispute can resolve the EXPERIMENT only. I can show experimentally the Hole teleportation and vacuum holes. You cannot go against experiment. The physics is governed by experiment. I can show experimentally all signs for vacuum holes.

Leshan,

You should put your ideas in mathematical terms and fight to get them published. Without math, they are only handwaving arguments that will always be dismissed.

You mentioned that you want to put an atomic clock to measure time changes near the place where collisions occur in a particle accelerator. This would not work for two reasons:

1. Practical reasons. By the very design of the accelerators, there is no room to put anything there.

2. Order of magnitude reasons. Gravity is an extremely weak force. The entire Earth cannot overcome the magnetic attraction between a magnet and metal plate. The space time curvature radius caused by the entire Earth is measured in light years. The most violent cosmic events create gravitational waves that are felt on Earth as displacement of less than 1 atomic distance for a meter of space. The space-time curvature (or your time effects) caused by a particle is many-many-many orders of magnitude smaller than the accuracy of the best atomic clock today.

Florin,

One my paper was accepted for publication already. I hope this paper will be published in 2010.

You wrote: 'The space-time curvature (or your time effects) caused by a particle is many-many-many orders of magnitude smaller than the accuracy of the best atomic clock today'

If we create artificial holes, it is a source of gravitation. Gravitation is a inverse-square force that depends on distance. Since the distance R between the source of gravitation and clocks can be very small, therefore the time dilation effect can be very substantial. We can create holes even inside of clocks, in this case R=0. The sensitivity of atomic clocks can be very high because we can measure time during a long interval of time. It is a cumulative effect. If the clocks measures time during 2 - 5 months, we can register even the very weak source of holes! I hope the atomic clocks will detect the time dilation inside of collider during the interval of time 2 - 5 months.

'By the very design of the accelerators, there is no room to put anything there'

Let's try to put atomic clocks in the vicinity of the place where collisions occur. The artificial holes emits hole radiation (gravitation), therefore I hope that clocks are able to detect time dilation effect even from distant sources. Although I wish to put clocks just inside of volume where collisions occurs. For this puprose we can use the laser (atom) beam as clocks.

7 days later

Humans must colonize planets in other solar systems - traveling there using 'Star Trek' - style propulsion - or face extinction, renowned British cosmologist Stephen Hawking said Thursday. "Sooner or later disasters such as an asteroid collision or a nuclear war could wipe us all out," said Professor Hawking. 'But once we spread out into space and establish independent colonies, our future should be safe,' said Hawking, who received the world's oldest award for scientific achievement, the Copley Medal, from Britain's Royal Society on Thursday. In order to survive, humanity would have to venture off to other hospitable planets orbiting another star, but conventional chemical fuel rockets that took man to the moon on the Apollo mission would take 50,000 years to travel there, he said [Reuters]. Looking beyond our solar system, there are billions of potential suns with possible colonization targets.

It is impossible to reach stars using rockets, we need a faster than light transportation system. The bad news is that the bulk of scientific knowledge that we have accumulated to date concludes that faster than light travel is impossible [NASA.gov]. We must search for New Physics outside of the Standard Model, we need breakthroughs in physics. My theory allows faster than light teleportation of matter at the distance 13 billions light years. My theory does not violate relativity; it is motion of a bubble of space-time. 'Although Special Relativity forbids objects to move faster than light within space-time, it is unknown how fast space-time itself can move'. Also my theory has advantages concerning wormhole and Alcubierre Warp drive because it requires NO EXOTIC MATTER, which means no messing around with hypothetical methods of creating the stuff. This system has great potential and sounds both reasonable and practical - sit inside a capsule, teleport to other side of the planet or the solar system in moments. No breaking the body down to molecules (as quantum teleportation). Hole teleportation theory has been considered in Teleportation Physics Study, page 52.

To prove my theory I need two atomic clocks only. I can show all experimental signs for holes in space-time. I do not need millions of dollars to prove this theory. I ask the entire world to help me to test my theory experimentally. My theory allows teleportation of matter. This technology will help increase the quality of life for all humanity.