Answering a Question Regarding the
Galactic Center’s Current Effects on the Sun and Earth
Paul LaViolette (P L) attempts to address some questions below.
From an email he received 1/16/06:
Dr. LaViolette and/or Staff at Starburst Foundation: Could it be that the solar sunspot activity that peaks every 11 years in our solar system is a reaction to a mini galactic superwave/ripple that hits our solar system at the same time? and if so, could a review of the 11 year sunspot cycles for increases in intensity (over however many sunspot cycles data has been collected) show a trend toward increased likelihood of a big event? It would seem that if the sun spot activity and output of energy from two or more consecutive 11 year cycle solar events showed an exponential upward curve trend in intensity that the third or fourth following 11 year cycle might be the big one, no?
P L: In the past, I had wondered whether the 11 and 22 year solar cycle may be related to long-period gravity potential fluctuations emanating from the Galactic core. The subquantum kinetics physics theory links gravity potential to genic energy production rate, and hence to solar output. That is, about 10 to 15 percent of the solar output is predicted to be of non-nuclear origin arising from photon blueshifting. The energy spontaneously generated through photon blueshifting is what I call genic energy. The rate of photon blueshifting and hence of genic energy production is predicted to correlate with the ambient value of the G potential. More negative gravity potential is predicted to create more supercritical conditions in the reactive ether which in turn increase the rate of photon blueshifting. So in theory cyclic changes in the G potential generated at the Galactic center could produce a cyclic effect on solar luminosity and possibly the level of sunspot activity. But there are no detectors I know of that will measure the ambient value of the gravity potential, particularly levels varying as slowly as 11 years peak to peak. Gravity wave detectors are of no help since they are designed to measure force, not potential, and forces that vary over short time scales (e.g., minutes). So it is difficult to test this hypothesis. Also the mother star Sgr A* at the center of the Galaxy has a mass of about 2.6 million solar masses as compared with 10 billion solar masses for the Galaxy’s central bulge. So even a large 50% variation in the mass of Sgr A* would produce only a 0.01% change in the local G potential or a change of one part per million in the Sun’s G potential (the Sun’s G potential being 50 times larger in magnitude than the Galaxy ambient). Since genic energy luminosity is about one tenth of the total solar luminosity, one would expect to see a change of only a tenth of a part per million in the Sun’s overall luminosity. The Sun’s luminosity instead changes by about 0.1% over one solar cycle. So it seems more likely that this solar cycle variation is due to processes intrinsic to the Sun and not to the Galactic center. If there were such a Galactic center effect, one would expect to see subtle cyclic variations in other stars that have a similar 11 and 22 year cycle period. But I don’t know that there is any evidence of this.
I don’t deny that there are ongoing gravity potential fluctuations coming from the center of the Galaxy that may affect the Earth. As I mention in Earth Under Fire, in the 1970’s Do. Weber at the University of Maryland claimed to have detected gravity waves with his gravity wave antenna and claimed that they emanated from the direction of the Galactic center. But his results were not believed by the scientific community. Also Townsend Brown reported changes in electro-gravitic force that had a correlation with the orientation of the zenith to the Galactic center.
The Gerhard Löbert Earth Changes Interviews:
Paul LaViolette also responds below to information recently circulated about Gerhard Löbert’s theories:
P.L. In early January (4th – 14th), Mitch Battros host of Earth Changes TV, an internet broadcast show, interviewed retired German physicist Do. Gerhard Löbert who claimed that the Galactic center has ongoing effects on the Earth and solar system. In his Earth Changes newsletter, Mitch says that Löbert is convinced that:
the Sun and the Earth are subjected to a continuous stream of small-amplitude quantum mechanical waves (generated at the center of the Galaxy) that produce a large number of correlated quasi periodic and aperiodic physical phenomena on these celestial bodies. These readily detectable galactic waves also trigger a large number of earthquakes.
He also reported Löbert as claiming that changes in the gravitational source strength at the Galactic center produce longitudinal “vacuum density waves” (i.e., gravity potential waves) and that when such a wave reaches the solar system and passes through the Earth and Sun:
…it induces a large number of correlated small-amplitude physical changes in these celestial bodies. In particular, when such a wave passes through the Earth, the atomic Bohr radius and the radius, circumference, rotational velocity, rotational axis angles and non-tidal gravitational acceleration of the Earth change in the ppb range. As a result of the circumference changes, earthquakes are triggered at the tectonic plate boundaries.
All this is very interesting if Löbert has evidence to substantiate what he is saying. At this point I am not clear how much of what he is saying is based on evidence and how much is conjecture. I find very little about him on the internet and a search on the physics archive and NASA science search engine turned up no scientific papers or preprints authored by him. I did not listen to the four part Earth Changes interview so don’t know any details. I did attempt to contact Mitch, had sent him two emails and later a fax. But, it has been almost two weeks now and I have received no answer back. Besides asking for more information, I had asked for a way to contact Löbert because if what Mitch states in his email is true, it is very relevant to my own superwave research and to the interests of the Starburst Foundation in general. So at this point it is a bit frustrating because I have no way to judge the validity of Löbert’s reported claims.
I have known Mitch now for almost nine years and have appeared on his talk show several times so Mitch is fairly well aware of my work and I know he has a copy of Earth Under Fire. But in his newsletter I did not see any reference to the prior published findings about superwaves. Nor did he indicate that Löbert made any comment about them. It is possible that the topic came up in their talk show interview, but I have not heard. I am wondering whether Löbert was aware of my previously published work on the gravitational effects of superwaves which has been around since 1983 (e.g., see Appdx D of the Galactic superwave CD ROM) and whether this stimulated his search for some of the above mentioned effects. If so, this is important to know because what he is saying tends to confirm these earlier writings about Galactic center gravitational effects.
In the above quote, Mitch mentions Löbert commenting about how such longitudinal gravity waves are active in triggering terrestrial earthquakes. Although not mentioned in Mitch’s newsletter, in February 2005 I had posted a webpage explaining how the December 26th Sumatran earthquake and tsunami may have been induced by a gravity wave arriving from the direction of the Galactic nucleus and that this was also associated with the gamma ray burst that was registered the next day; see Tsunami. Also the November/December issue of the German magazine Mysteries carried a story by Johann Wilkes reporting about this tsunami triggering theory. So, I am quite interested to learn if Do. Löbert has some additional evidence.
Mitch’s newsletter also reports Löbert as stating that the generation of longitudinal gravitational waves in the center of the Milky Way:
…is discernible in the anomalous parts-per-billion fluctuations of a large number of geo- and astrophysical quantities such as the non-tidal gravitational acceleration, the rotational velocity of the Earth, the VLBI base lengths, the LEO satellite orbital elements, and the inclination of the rotational axis of the Earth. The close time correlation between large earthquakes on different continents and between quakes on the Earth and on the Moon shows that a large proportion of the devastating earthquakes are triggered by longitudinal gravitational waves… These waves also explain the close correlation between sunspot number and Earth volcanic activity that has been clearly identified in the records of the past 400 years.
Again, if true, these are important findings, although no literature references are given in Mitch’s newsletter. If there are correlations between quakes on the Earth and Moon this would indeed strengthen my proposal that the tsunami quake was triggered by a gravitational wave. In agreement with Löbert’s claim, I have proposed that these Galactic center gravitational waves associated with a superwave would be longitudinal, rather than transverse. This was an assumption evident in the calculations published in my 1983 dissertation. Although, if Löbert postulates that these ongoing waves are generated by the orbiting of very massive celestial bodies, then his proposal should consider that there would also be a prominent transverse component present in the gravitational wave signal.
Also some of these effects, if real, would corroborate some predictions that come out of subquantum kinetics. For example, subquantum kinetics predicts that the mass of a body should increase when gravity potential drops, an effect that accounts for the gravitational precession of Mercury’s orbit. This mass change effect is not predicted by general relativity, although this subquantum kinetics effect does serve as an alternative to general relativity’s space-time-warping explanation for Mercury’s precession. If a correlation can be shown between a change in gravity potential and the rate of terrestrial spin, this would be strong evidence supporting subquantum kinetics since a change in terrestrial mass would produce a proportionate change in the rate of Earth’s axial rotation. Also the findings that the VLBI lengths change in response to a change in gravity potential is also of considerable interest since subquantum kinetics predicts that lengths should contract with a drop in gravity potential, a phenomenon that is associated with the mass change effect (i.e., a contraction in the Compton wavelength of a subatomic particle would produce an increase in the particle’s inertial mass). These various gravitational effects and the more standard relativistic effects which are also predicted by special and general relativity are discussed in Chapter 5 of Subquantum Kinetics.
Löbert also contends that there was a “big bang” and that this has caused a continuous expansion of the ether which in turn causes a continuous drop in etheron (or his term “seaon”) concentration and that this in turn leads to various secular changes, some of which he says include changes in the electromagnetic properties of the vacuum (permittivity and permeability?), the speed of light, and the gravitational “constant”. However, I feel there is substantial evidence against the expanding universe theory and its big bang assumption, for example, see the Astrophysical Journal paper Is the Universe Really Expanding? (available for free download) and discussions in the books Subquantum Kinetics and Genesis of the Cosmos. As of the present date, this disproof of the big bang theory remains in force. If one needs to propose the existence of secular changes in various fundamental “constants”, if such changes are shown to be real, one could look to a secular change in the gravity potential (G etheron concentration) which need not be due to a universal ether expansion. Such changes in the speed of light and gravitational constant do follow out of subquantum kinetics.
Finally, Löbert also contends that “the heat surplus of Jupiter and Saturn” is due to “the extremely small but finite dependence of the gravitational force on the relative velocity of two gravitationally interacting bodies.” I would note that I have already shown that this effect is explained by the subquantum kinetics genic energy prediction (which attributes the energy source ultimately to the ether). In choosing between the two explanations, one should consider that subquantum kinetics predicted the intrinsic energy of the heavy planets back in 1979 and has led to three a priori predictions that were subsequently verified. Among these are the planetary-stellar mass luminosity relation, the brown dwarf M-L ratios, and the Pioneer effect; e.g., see the review in my Pioneer effect paper.
In summary, Gerhard Löbert’s information is very interesting, but the Earth Changes newsletter provides no reference to its publication either in a book or technical paper and provides no reference to the discussed observational findings. So, until there is something more tangible, we must withhold passing further judgment about these findings.
