Global Scaling
© Raum&ZeitGlobal Scaling?
There may exist technologies that are dangerous to know. Perhaps not just "to know", but rather "to sell". Quite often we read about "free energy" and/or "instant communication" technologies. There is usually some kind of a scam involved nearby. That does not necessarily mean that there is nothing but scam. What is true and what is not - that's the million dollar question. Hartmut Müller's "Global Scaling" is one such example, as we will see below.

Usually there is some kind of a "theory" going around, a "theory" that tries to package the claims of those who patent, produce and try to sell extraordinary gadgets into attractive and colorful shiny boxes. Without a theory, who will buy them? The same, or almost the same gadget can be wrapped up in different theories in different parts of the world. These theories more often than not claim to be based on some mathematics and some physics. Since I am both, a little bit of a mathematician and a little bit of a physicist, trying to be rationally irrational and open-minded, I like to read all the "strange" stuff that I can find. And what I read, I share.

Just before Christmas I ordered a book by A. G. Parkhomov "Earth, Cosmos, Man" - only available in Russian - so it's a lucky thing that I learned to speak and read Russian almost before I learned my mother tongue, Polish. I hope to write more about Parkhomov's exciting research on nuclear phenomena after studying his book. But it is only this morning that I received an email telling me that the book has been shipped. Therefore I had to change my plans and reschedule my posting of articles in this series. Which is not that difficult because there are lots of exciting new things that happen every day and that are worth sharing.

For instance, just a few days ago I stumbled upon the subject of "The Theory of Global Scaling" [1] , "Time Wave", "free gravitational phones" etc, and the strange story of the "inventor", Hartmut Müller. Apparently, with gravitational phones, you can call free, person to person, using "shock gravity waves".

That is, before you go to jail:

Support Hartmut Müller
Yet, that is not my subject for today. My subject for today is another conspiracy: The Quantum Conspiracy. Quantum conspiracy and Quantum Enigma.

Enigma was a German cipher machine that was used during WWII:

© WikipediaEnigma
Its code was cracked by Polish mathematicians, then:
Alan Turing, a Cambridge University mathematician and logician, provided much of the original thinking that led to the design of the cryptanalytical Bombe machines and the eventual breaking of naval Enigma.
Nowadays there is a lot of research going into "quantum cryptography". Alan Turing is dead, so he is not going to help us with cracking quantum enigmas. The fact that, after so many years, Queen Elizabeth II granted a rare mercy pardon to Alan Turing will not change much. And yet ....

Alan Turing was deeply interested in quantum theory and left some strange, cryptic and heretical notes related to the subject. Here is one excerpt from "Alan Turing: the enigma" by Andrew Hodges:
If he was looking for something new, it was in theoretical physics, which likewise he had put on one side since the 1930s. Before the war he had spoken to Alister Watson of his interest in the 'spinors' that appeared in Dirac's theory of the electron, and in his last year he did some work on the algebraic foundations of the spinor calculus. He defined what he called 'founts', after printers' founts of type.* He was also interested in the idea Dirac had suggested in 1937, according to which the constant of gravitation would change with the age of the universe. Once at lunchtime he said to Tony Brooker, 'Do you think that a palaeontologist could tell from the footprint of an extinct animal, whether its weight was what it was supposed to be?' And always distrustful of the official line in quantum mechanics, he revived his interest in the foundations of the subject. He found a paradox within the standard interpretation, as von Neumann had set it out, because he noticed that if a quantum system were 'observed' frequently enough, its evolution could be made indefinitely slow, and in the limit of continuous observation would freeze to a stop. Thus the standard account depended upon an implicit assumption that this mysterious moment of 'observation' occurred only at discrete intervals.

He had some further heretical ideas which he explained to Robin: 'Quantum Mechanists always seem to require infinitely many dimensions; I don't think I can cope with so many - I'm going to have about a hundred or so - that ought to be enough, don't you think?' And he had the germ of another idea: 'Description must be non-linear, prediction must be linear.' A shift of interest on his part into fundamental physics would have been well-timed; the development of relativity theory was to begin a great revival in 1955, after years in wartime doldrums. The interpretation of quantum mechanics, little developed since von Neumann's work in 1932, was also a subject crying out for new ideas, and was one well suited to his particular kind of mind. [Emphases, AJ.]
And then we have also this message from Alan Turing that needs to be decrypted:

Turing Hyperboloids
© A short poem written by Turing in 1954
Hyperboloids of wondrous Light
Rolling for aye through Space and Time
Harbour there Waves which somehow Might
Play out God’s holy pantomime.
Why is quantum cryptography important? First and foremost: quantum events are considered to be "truly random". This belief that quantum phenomena are ''truly random" seems to be widespread. The ''true randomness" of quantum event generating processes is related to the ''security" of quantum key distribution" (QKD). So, for instance, in a letter to Nature entitled "Random Numbers Certified by Bell's Theorem" [2], eleven distinguished international experts in cryptography state:
''... we show that the nonlocal correlations of entangled quantum particles can be used to certify the presence of genuine randomness.
This strong form of randomness generation is impossible classically and possible in quantum systems only if certified by a Bell inequality violation ..."
In another paper on the subject [3] we can find a bit more of an explanation:

Even before unconditional security was technically proved, "security based on the laws of physics" became the selling slogan of QKD. It's catchy, and it can be understood correctly - but it may also be understood wrongly and has often been explicitly spelled out as "security based only on the laws of physics".

Of course, a pause of reflection shows that the statement cannot possibly be as strong as that. For instance, the laws of physics do not prevent someone from reading the outcomes of a detector; however, if the adversary has access to that information, security is clearly compromised! But many people were just carried away by the power of the slogan - fair enough, this does not happen only with QKD.

On the wings of enthusiasm, some promoters of QKD also managed to convey the impression that they were presenting the solution for (almost) every task of secret communication. This may have impressed some sponsors. However, the main result was to alienate a great part of the community of experts in classical cryptography, who, unfamiliar with quantum physics though they may be, could not fail to spot the overstatement. ...
But we know that every theoretical scheme in physics has a limited domain of application. Beyond these domains the underlying assumptions, and therefore also the model, are no longer valid. Why would quantum theory be different?

As long as quantum theory is used only for "predictions", according to Turing, it must stay linear. But what if we go beyond pure statistical predictions and start looking for non-linear description? Can we can then start to see the phenomena that seem to be random at one level, but are not random at all at another level? What if we put gravity into the game, with its "gravity waves"?

We may end up in jail, that's for sure. But aren't we in jail already, with our blind belief in the universality of the standard linear quantum theory?

The Universe may be cyclic. Is such a thought heretical enough? That is not excluded. Paul H. Frampton is a professor of theoretical physics. His web page at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill states:
Louis D. Rubin Jr., Distinguished Professor,
Department of Physics and Astronomy,
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Festschrift 1
Nobelist coauthors (3) 1
List of talks (555 in 32 countries) 1
List of books (3 as author) 1
Journal articles (279) 1
Important papers (18) 1
List of publications (515) 1
Curriculum vitae 1
PhD students and postdocs (37) 1
Previous teaching (57 courses) 1
Prime numbers (amateur interest) 1
Yet Wikipedia tells us also that:

In November 2012, Frampton was convicted and sentenced to 56 months for drug smuggling in Argentina.He claimed to have been the victim of a scam after supposedly meeting a model on a dating website, and that he had been tricked by gangsters into transporting cocaine hidden in the liner fabric of a suitcase.
What is it in Frampton's research that caused his life to become so complicated? Is it something in his book "Will Time End?" about cyclic universes?
Most likely. The present expansion will end after a finite time, the universe will contract, bounce and repeat the cycle. A cyclic universe. Time had no beginning and will have no end. This presumes that the entropy problem has been resolved as discussed in this book.
Time seems to be a dangerous subject (By the way, at a conference in Florence in June 2013 I was talking about "Time in Quantum Theory". Now I have to write it down for publication! I hope I don't get put in jail on some trumped up charge!). Time loops, time waves, recurrent times ... (but dating web sites are also dangerous - everybody should know this and avoid them). Assuming that time is cyclic, let me go back to the beginning. Hartmut Müller, now in jail, proposed a new wireless "gravitational" technology.

© Raum&ZeitGravitation waves phone
Looks suspicious? Well, perhaps it's true? Or is it?

IREF technology
© Raum&ZeitMonopoly not intended?
The technology will not be revealed? But: "The Russians have it already for ten years!"

If I am reading this correctly: perhaps there is some technology, but all the rest is mostly crap. The "theory" has nothing to do with technology, and is either unknown or kept somewhere in the world in a deep, secret, underground location. Perhaps both are true: what is being kept in secrecy is also crap, just on a different scale. Nevertheless PROTOSAFE systems based on quantum proton resonance global scaling gravitational logarithmic fractal waves are waiting for you to buy. On March 23, 2010 the main organizer of PROTOSAFE and Müller's financial advisor, Gerhard Steinbach, was found dead (owing to the gravitational force in his cell, no doubt).

All of that can be quite exciting, but I prefer to talk about perhaps less exciting but more reliable and open research.

So, stay tuned.


[1] Raum & Zeit English, "Special 1: Free Energy" (Wolfratshausen, Germany: Ehlers Verlag).

[2] Pironio, S. ; Acin, A. ; Massar, R. ; Giroday, A. Boyer de l.; Matsukevich, D. N. ; Maunz, P. ; Olmschenk, S. ; Hayes, D. ; Luo, L. ; Manning, T. A. ; Monroe, C., "Random Numbers Certified by Bell's Theorem", Nature 464 (2010), p. 1021 - 1024

[3] Scarani, Valerio ; Kurtsiefer, Christian: "The black paper of quantum cryptography: real implementation problems", . Version: June 2009