Unforgettable, unforgivable, Stefan...
(Si veda anche la foto con cui si apre il Reprint di Omero Speri e Piero Zorzi nella I Parte di questo stesso numero/
See also the photograph which appears in the Reprint by Omero Speri and Piero Zorzi in the first Part of this same number)
 

Marinov: Annus Horribilis
(The Story of) A Payed Advertisement Published by Nature

(Stefan Marinov)

The year l996 will be an earthquake year for conventional physics: many formulas in the textbooks will be changed, many century-old dogmas will be renounced and many saints will be de-sainted. This radical change had to begin tens of years ago but the lack of glasnost in physics all over the world has delayed it and instead to have evolutional step-by-step reformations and several lighter earthquakes, now there will be a tremendous one. Vous l'avez voulu, Georges Dandins!

By my half-a-century experimental and theoretical work I showed the following (see references in my 16 books, 60 refereed papers, 8 paid advertisements and numerous papers and editor's comments in the journal DEUTSCHE PHYSIK edited by me):

1. The principle of relativity is wrong. Indeed, I rneasured three times optico-mechanically and once electromagnetically the Earth's absolute velocity. Its magnitude is 350 km sec^-1 wlth equatorial coordinates of its apex d = -20° , a = 12^h (approx.).

2. The principle of equivalence is wrong. Indeed, my interferometric "coupled mirrors" experiment which was carried out during a year showed that when the laboratory's acceleration was kinematic (acceleration with respect to distant stars), the laboratory's velocity changed, while when it was dynamic (gravitational attraction by the Earth) there was no change.

3. The energy conservation law is wrong. My machines MAMIN COLIU and VENETIN COLIU which work with zero, or near to zero, Lenz effect, and SIBERIAN COLIU which works with anti-Lenz effect violated this law. Only because of lack of money I could not close the energetic cycle in the first two, but the third one was not expensive and I could run it as a perpetuum mobile. The day when I shall present this machine at a press-conference will be the start-day for the earthquake.

4. The Lorentz equation is wrong. If there are two electric charges q , q' moving with velocities v , v' and the vector-distance from q' to q is r , according to the Lorentz equation the force with which q'v' acts on qv is given by the following Grassmann formula

f_G = (m ₀qq'/4p r³){(v.r)v' - (v.v')r}. (1)

Numerous experiments done by other authors (Hering's experiments are from the beginning of the century!) and by me showed that the force acting on qv can be not only transverse to its velocity, as required by (1), but also longitudinal. Any rational man when seeing at least one falsifying experiment rejects the respective formula (Popper), however for thousands and thousands of Betonköpfe [heads made with ferro-concrete!] even hundred experiments were not enough. In the photograph [not included in the original] there is one such falsifying experiment which (as well as the other) can be carried out by children: A cylindrical magnet is cut along one of its axial planes and the one half is turned up-down (the magnetic forces themselves do the rotation). Around this magnet, there is à trough filled with mercury in which the copper ring which can be seen at right swims (the children take salt solution and suspend the ring on threads). After sending current of some tens of amperes from the battery at left, which is regulated by the rheostat, the ring begins to rotate. That's all!

5. The Lorentz-Marinov equation is the right one. As according to (1) f'_G is not equal and oppositely directed to f_G , I obtained Marinov formula by the most simple and natural symmetrization of (1) (take into account that r = -r')

f_M = (f_G - f'_G)/2 = (m ₀qq'/8p r³){(v'.r)v + (v.r)v' - 2(v.v')r} . (2)

Proceeding from (2), and assuming  F ¹ 0 , ¶ A/¶ t ¹ 0 , I obtained by the most simple calculations that the force with which an electric system acts on a test charge q moving with velocity v is

f/q = -gradF - ¶ A/¶ t + v´ B + vS = E_lor + v´ B + vS , (3)

where F , A are the electric and magnetic potentials generated by the system at the point of the charges location, B_lor = rotA is the Lorentz magnetic intensity, S_whit = -divA/2 is the Whittaker magnetic intensity and

B_mar = -(m ₀/8p )q'(v´ v')(r.v)/v²r³ ,

S_mar = -(m ₀/8p )q'(v.v')(r.v)/v²r³ , (4)

are the Marinov vector and scalar magnetic intensities. B = B_lor + B_mar is called vector magnetic intensity and S = S_whitt + S_mar is called scalar magnetic intensity. (3) is called the Lorentz-Marinov equation. If neglecting the last term and under B we understand B_lor we obtain the Lorentz equation which I call the Lorentz-Grassmann equation. That's the whole theory!

6. The angular momentum conservation law is wrong. My Bul-Cub machine with interrupted current and rotating Ampere bridge with interrupted current rotated under the action of internal forces only. Marinov's formula allows violation of the angular momentum conservation law as the magnetic forces with which two charges interact are equal and oppositely directed but may not lie on the line connecting them.

7. It is impossible to violate the momentum conservation law in electromagnetism. Obvious conclusion from Marinov's formula.

8. Displacement current does not exist. For closed circuits both Grassmann and Marinov formulas do not allow violation of the momentum and angular momentum conservation laws as the first terms in (1) and (2) contain total differentials. As conventional physics believes in the displacement current of Maxwell, it accepts that all currents always are closed. I showed by numerous experiments that there is no displacement current (neither in vacuum nor in dielectrics) and one can interrupt the circuits by the help of condensers. At the age of 15 I understood that displacement current is a phantasmagoria and presented to my teacher in Sofia the following objection: "If the displacement current between the plates of a condenser acts with magnetic forces on other currents, then according to Newton's third law the other currents must act with magnetic forces on the displacement current and set it in motion. But how, comrade teacher, can vacuum be set in motion?" Teacher's answer was: "Shut up, child!"

9. The gauge transformations are illegitimate. According to conventional physics not the potentials but the intensities determine the motion of the test charge (exactly the opposite is true), and thus any change of the potentials which leaves the intensities the same is allowable, i.e. one can calibrate the potentials. It is easy to see that the calibration divA = 0 is allowable. Thus conventional physics believes that a really existing force, the Whittaker force f_w = -qvdivA/2 = qvS_whitt can be put equal to zero. Monstrosity! To see the action of f_w take two metal spheres the one charged positively and the other negatively. Put around one of the spheres a circular wire along which current flows, so that it is perpendicular to the line connecting the spheres. When connecting the spheres by a wire and current begins to flow, the circular wire begins to rotate. The only force which acts on the circular wire is f_w .

10. There is no propagation of interaction. As only mass can move from one point to another, "interaction" can be only a ghost. But a rational man does not believe in ghosts. on the other hand, the mathematical expressions of B_mar and S_mar show that the "fields" cannot propagate in space with a certain velocity, as B_mar and S_mar depend on the direction of motion of the test charge. To these people who may object that one is not sure whether the Lorentz-Marinov equation is the right one, my answer is: Until the day when some falsifying experiment should be presented (ths day will never come!) the world is impelled to accept it as true.

11. Potential, radiation and radiation reaction electric intensities. These three kinds of intensities can be obtained if putting in the expression for the Lorentz electric intensity E_lor (see (3)) the observation electric and magnetic potentials

F = q/4p e ₀r , A = m ₀qv/4p r

with r = r' - v'.r'/c , v = v' + u'r'/c, (5)

where r , v , u are distance, velocity and acceleration at the observation moment t and r' , v' , u' at the advanced mornent t' = t - r/c (conventional physics wrongly calls t' "retarded moment"). Conventional physics, following Lienard and Wiechert, wrongly writes A with v' . For this reason conventional physics obtains only the potential and radiation intensities, E_pot , E_rad , and artificially introduces the radiation reaction intensity E_rea coming to phantasmagoric "self-accelerations". Proceeding from (5) I (and any child who can differentiate!) obtained also the radiation reaction intensity E_rea = -m ₀qw/6p c , where w = w' is the charge's super-acceleration. E_rad = m ₀qr'´ {(r' - v'r'/c)´ u'}/4p (r' - v'.r'/c) is due to moving mass (radiated energy), as charges moving with acceleration lose energy, while E_rea acts on the radiating charge itself. To obtain all radiation effects one has simply to integrate the obtained formulas for a single charge. That's nearly all about radiation of electromagnetic waves!

12. There are no "fields". According to the "field-marshals" the "fields" exist physically. One can move them and a moving magnetic field produces electric field, etc. When I hear all these stupidities, I get diarrhea. After repeating the Rowland experiment (a magnetic needle near a charged disk deviates when the disk is set in rotation), I carried out the inverse one (the disk at rest, the needle rotates) and the co-moving one (disk and needle rotate), taking instead of a needle a Hall detector. According te the "field-marshals" the inverse experiment must give the same effect as the direct one (I observed no effect), while the co-moving experiment must give null result (I observed the same effect as the direct experiment). The inertial experiments can be done charging a conveyer belt.

13. Current conducting wires become charged positively. Conventional physics asserts that they remain neutral (Clausius postulate). Meanwhile always after measurements, the rheostat in the photograph [included in the original but not here, due to its poor quality] remained charged and touching it by hand there was a spark. The positive sign was established by the method known to ancient Greeks. Every child explains the effect taking into account that the positive electrode of the battery "sucks" electrons from the wire while the negative electrode "spits" electrons and the former effect is primary.

14. B-machines and S-machines. The electromagnetic machines working on B are called B-machines and these ones working on S are called S-machines. By the help of the first three fingers of his right hand any child older than 15 can show when looking at the third term in (3) that the B-generators brake. Meanwhile by the help of only one finger any child younger than 15 can show when looking at the fourth term in (3) that the S-generators accelerate.

15. The perpetuum mobile SIBERIAN COLIU. S_whitt produced by the first term in (2) and for a complete circuit is null. For this reason can be observed only at interrupted circuits (see item 9). However S_mar can be different from zero also for a complete circuit. Why then has nobody observed it? - Because all people have worked with cylindrical or quasi-cylindrical magnets for which S_mar = 0 . Who has cut a cylindrical rnagnet in two pieces rotating the one half up-down? - NOBODY!!! The first man who has done this is called Gennadi Nicolaev and lives in Tomsk [... - Russian words follow]. For this reason I called this magnet the SIBERIAN COLIU magnet and the perpetuum mobile which I constructed with it is the SIBERIAN COLIU machine. The machine shown in the photograph [once again not included in the original] is a SIBERIAN COLIU machine. It will work as a perpetuum mobile if the driving torque produced by the current induced in the ring when it will be set in rotation with a certain velocity will be larger than the friction torque. I constructed this machine in the photograph in 1993 and the last three years I did nothing else than to try to increase its driving torque and decrease its friction torque. The driving torque was produced only by the S (i.e., S_mar ) currents. S_mar is very strong near the cutting plane, from the one side positive, from the other negative. The dozens of my SIBERIAN COLIU machines are presented with photographs in DEUTSCHE PHYSIK.

16. All conventional theories for the origin of Earth's magnetization are wrong. If rotating a cylindrical piece of any metal by a boring machine, one sees that it becomes magnetized. Conventional physics believes first that only ferromagnetics become magnetized and second that the magnetization is proportional to the angular rotational velocity, as this was promulgated by Barnett. My friend C. Monstein demonstrated that the magnetization is proportional to the linear rotational velocity and I called this the Monstein-Barnett effect. Proceeding from the Monstein-Barnett effect I calculated the magnetization of the Earth, the Sun and the planets, obtaining excellent coincidences with the measured values. As Venus is the only planet whose nucleus is liquid, it is not magnetized. The most cherished conventional theory for Earth's magnetization is the "unipolar dynamo theory" of Elsasser. It is ridiculous, as a unipolar machine can work only at the existence of sliding contacts and moving with respect to each other parts.

17. Magretic energy does exist. By the most elementary speculations and calculations I showed that: a) the gravitational energy of two masses is not a negative quantitiy, as accepted by conventional physics, but a positive quantity, b) the gravitational potential generated by all masses of the universe is equal to c² , c) electricity and gravity are two completely analogical sciences from a mathematical point of view. The only difference is that the gravitational "charges" are the proper masses m₀ = m/(1 - v²/c²)^1/2 and that negative masses do not exist. There are no other differences. Thus a magretic energy, i.e., a "magnetic kind" of energy in gravity must exist and gravity is to be called gravimagretism (this is the title of part IV of my encyclopaedic work CLASSICAL PHYSICS). I proposed a very simple experiment which can reveal the existence of magretic energy. This experiment, moreover, can serve for measurement of the Earth's absolute velocity.

18. The recession hypothesis for the galaxies is wrong. I call stellar "red shift" this one which is caused by the gravitational action of the star on the emitted by it light, galactic "red shift" this one which is caused by the gravitational action of the respective gaIaxy and cosmic - by all cosmic matter. Conventional physic believes that the big "red shifts" of Iight coming from remote galaxies are due to their recession velocities. This is a phantasmagoria. The most simple calculation, which can be carried out by any child, shows that they are due to the gravitational action of all cosmic matter and that they are proportional not to the distance of the emitting galaxy (or quasar) but to the square of this distance. I showed that the experimental data fit much better to a square plot. Respectively, instead of a Hubble constant, a Hubble-Marinov constant is te be introduced, for which the children obtain the strictly defined value H_M² = 2p g m /3c² , where g is the gravitationa constant and m is the average mass density in the Universe.

NOTE. On the 5 March 1996 I submitted to NATURE my paper AFTER 500 YEARS COLUMBUS-EGG-PROBLEM HAS FINALLY BEEN SOLVED, in which I show how a body can be maintained in a state of UNSTABLE equilibrium (problem which, contrary to the general opinion, Columbus has NOT solved). My "Marinov egg" is supported by magnetic forces. If it has SPHERICAL form, it has three degrees of freedom (the Euler angles) free and represents moreover a PERPETUUM MOBILE. If before the 1 May the paper will not appear in the scientific columns of NATURE, I shall publish it as a paid advertisement. In the first (or second) case 15 days after the publication I shall present my SIBERIAN COLIU perpetuun mobile at a press conference.

Stefan Marinov

Morellenfeldgasse 16, A-8010 Graz
 
 

[The previous pages are reproduced from pp. 34-35 of Marinov's Deutsche Physik (International Glasnost Journal on Fundamental Physics), Vol. 5, N. 19, July-September 1996, and appeared in Nature, Vol. 380, N. 6572, 28 March 1996, p. xiv, as a payed Advertisement, with the attached NOTE as reported. Marinov extensively explains later on in his journal (pp. 40-45) how he tried to publish instead the following text, but that he was told that: "we are enable to publish the advertisement unless [this note] is deleted [...] we would naturally refund your money" (letter from Nature, 15th March 1996), so that he had to accept at last the publication of an "amended" version.]

> In my advertisement (whose text is published on p. 34 of this issue) the following NOTE was attached:

NOTE. In 1986 Dr. Maddox, the then-editor of NATURE, accepted for publication my big paper "Experimental violations of the principles of relativity, equivalence, and conservation of energy and angular momentum". During my visit in March 1987 he personaily began to compose this paper on his computer and I stayed in his office and corrected any sheet which he gave me. He could not compose the whole paper and I left London. However during a year the composition of the paper remained, as Schubert's symphony, unvollendet. Thus in June 1988 I flew to London and composed the paper myself in NATURE's composition office. The paper had to appear on the 18 August 1988 but because of the Benveniste's case ìts publìcatiori was postponed for the 13 October. "I do not have the stomach for a second battle in such a short tirme" wrote to me Dr. Maddox on the 29 July. This paper is still not published. If the paper will not appear in the scientifìc columns of NATURE until the 1 May 1996, I shall publish it as a paid advertisement. In the first (or second) case 15 days after the publicatìon of the paper I shall present my perpetuum mobile SIBERIAN COLIU at a press conference.

As in a week or so after my 13-February-letter no answer came from Mrs. Smith, I asked her on the phone which is the matter. She told me that there are problems with the NOTE and that she has to consult Dr. Campbell and Dr. Maddox. Until the 26 February no answer came and I phoned again. [...] [The conclusion of this story has already been mentioned: after Nature's refusal of 15th March, Marinov proposed a different shortened version, which was found acceptable: "I can confirm that your amended paragraph of today is acceptable for publication" [loc. cit., p. 45].
 
 

[The following one is Nature's letter of 26th January 1996 (see the quoted issue of Deutsche Physik, p. 38) which refused a paper proposed by Marinov only a few days before, namely on 22nd January 1996. It was this circumstance which forced him to ask for the publication of the payed advertisement above.]
 
 

MARINOV'S NOTE.

First I would like to note that if an editor has pricks of conscience when rejecting a paper, he never mentions in bis rejecting letter (if he decides such a letter to write!) the title of the paper and the date of submission. The same does Dr. Campbell in his above letter. Thus the title of my rejected article was

EXPERIMENTAL VIOLATIONS OF THE PRINCIPLES OF RELATIVITY, EQUIVALENCE, AND CONSERVATION OF ENERGY AND ANGULAR MOMENTUM,

and it was submitted on the 22 January 1996 by post.

This paper, as a matter of fact, was accepted for publication by Dr. Maddox in April 1986 and in final form in June 1988 but it never appeared in NATURE (see the story in detail in the following pages). The paper, as composed by me in June in London was published in THE THORNY WAY OF TRUTH, Part III (1988), p. 146.

But Dr. Campbell allowed to me to publish an advertisenìent in NATURE and in her fax of the 9 February Mrs. Smith wrote me that the price for two pages will be 5290 £.
 
 

[Furthermore, on April 1996, after a new correspondence's exchange, Dr. Campbell wrote to Marinov the following final letter, which is published at p. 50 of the quoted issue of Deutsche Physik, together with a comment of our poor friend Stefan*.]
 
 

> Only in religion and similar AUTHORITATIVE spiritual and ideological domains are there "orthodox" and "unorthodox" views. In physics there are views confirmed or rejected by experiments. Of course, there are views for whose verification there are no experiments, or contradictory views which predict the same experiments. However a FORMULA can be either right or wrong, a formula cannot be "orthodox" or "unorthodox". In my writings I present FORMULAS. And I present EXPERIMENTS which can be calculated by these formulas and which cannot be calculated by the formulas of "orthodox" physics.
 
 

[* On the morning of July 15th 1997, Stefan Marinov committed suicide in Graz, the Austrian town where he lived very poorly since many years as an exile. As far as his scientific activity is concerned, since the times of the previous Advertisement, he had the resources to edit three more numbers of Deutsche Physik, namely NN. 20, 21 and 22: the very last one is dated April-June 1997...

More information about this singular figure of dissident XXth Century physicist can be found in the article N. 13 ("In Stefan Marinov memoriam") published at the web page:

http://www.dipmat.unipg.it/~bartocci/listast.htm .]