Caustic Bottle Caustic Bytes Shark Teeth 


    On Friday 13th March 2009 a theory (The Clements Theory 2009, herein after referred to as "The Theory") explaining the universe was published on the internet at or around 19.00 hours. Nearly eight months later the BBC, through their long running science programme, Horizon, broadcast an edition entitled "Who's Afraid of a Big Black Hole". The major contributors from the world of science to this edition were Max Tegmark of MIT, Michio Kaku of City University NY, Lawrence Krauss of Arizona State University, Reinhardt Genzel of The Max Planck Institute, Doug Leonard of SDSU, Andrew Strominger and Ramesh Narayan of Harvard University, a stunning array of talent. At this time the Horizon team might have been totally unaware of The Theory. Horizon asked "what are black holes made of", "are black holes made of anything", questions which could not be answered by the contributors. The narrator thought that "black holes are completely black" and Doug Leonard thought that "black holes start as stars and then implode to form black holes". Michio Kaku concurs with Einstein that gravity is caused by the bending of space and time and the narrator said that "black holes would bend space and time to breaking point" Max Tegmark talked of "space flowing faster near a black hole" and the narrator said that"space flowed faster than the speed of light at a point beyond the event horizon". All contributors talked of a "singularity" at the centre of every black hole but, BY DEFINITION, the Singularity is THE ONE AND ONLY! The narrator stated that, at the centre of a black hole "Einstein's mathematics breaks down completely. At this point Mr. Kaku shows the maths giving an answer of infinity but he could not accept the answer as it did not fit in with all he knew about physics. In 1939 Einstein suggested that we would never find a black hole but Krauss thought Einstein's reasoning was incomplete. Genzel made the first real move when, using an infra red telescope, he "saw" our own black hole and calculated it's mass as 4M times that of our sun but, relative to it's mass, was quite small. After that Narayan stated that a black hole was relative to the size of the galaxy it controlled, usually about 1000 times smaller than the galaxy it controlled. Now we have Kaku saying that "black holes represent one of the most dominant forces in the universe". In their belief that every black hole has a "singularity at its centre which is very, very small" Quantum Physics is brought into the broadcast. Strominger is convinced that "Quantum Mechanics is the key to understanding black holes", but the narrator says"Quantum Mechanics cannot equate with gravity" so they introduce Quantum Gravity (a quantum aspect of Einstein's work) to the programme. Mr. Kaku shows how Quantum Mechanics has the same "infinity flaw" as Einstein's maths. He then shows Quantum Gravity to calculate  a chain of infinities which, once again, he cannot accept., saying "this is the collapse of physics as we know it, nature is smarter than we are". The narrator says that "black holes and the theory that explains them remains just out of our reach", Kaku says "they are out there, beyond our mathematics, beyond our physical theories and demanding a theory beyond Einstein's". The narrator says"the gravity of a black hole warps space focussing the light from behind them to make a corona", drawing on the work of Shep Doleman (MIT) and the narrator wants "a theory to explain black holes and what happened before our universe was formed", Narayan wants "a new Einstein" but all were convinced that we need "another point of view". Let us go back to basics! Space is a vacuum, nothing, so HOW can we bend nothing? Space is a vacuum, nothing, so HOW can nothing flow, whether or not faster than the speed of light? All this is explained in The Theory.

    The Theory has a subtitle of "Another Point of View", explains black holes, explains the universe is an infinity but, due to the lack of control of the big bang, is actually a chain of infinities. What a pity the Horizon research team are so lax in their duties but, had they seen The Theory, there would have been nothing to make a programme about. Following on from this broadcast the author of The Theory sent emails to the BBC, BBC Horizon and all the major contributors with no reply. After this he emailed all physics contributors to any Horizon edition he watched with no reply. Finally he wrote to the BBC regarding the potential for Horizon to consider his work. On the 4th May 2011, the BBC acknowledged his letter and enclosed a letter from them to their own Horizon team asking them to consider the contents and reply. No such reply was ever received from Horizon by the author. Because of this, he wrote his own letter to Horizon and, once again, received neither answer nor acknowledgement from them. In April 2012 The Theory was streamcast, without any recourse to the author, by an organisation in Southern California to who knows how many people. The author has no knowledge of who saw the streamcast, what field of effort they worked in, and wondered why this organisation took no heed of the copyright statement. The author is investigating as he holds the most robust evidence of copyright that he is certain will stand in a court of law!

    The Theory is written in every day English so you do not have to be a professor to understand it but it appears it is way beyond the comprehension of the Horizon production team. Why does CB say this? Because they broadcast another Horizon edition on Wednesday 26th June 2013 entitled "Eaten by a Black Hole". This programme, broadcast to millions of viewers has obviously not considered The Theory and they have had two years to do so. In this programme, the narrator says "black holes are a boundary between the known universe and a place that will forever lie beyond the reach of science. They are an anomaly of gravity so strange it is barely possible to comprehend" Shame the narrator had not read The Theory! Professor Eliot Quataert (UC Brekeley) says "black holes represent the regions where our current theories of physics fail completely. What happens there we don't know so our understanding predicts it's own failure". Shame he didn't read The Theory, or that Horizon, seemingly, did not check this out with him.  The programme then showed how Professor Donald Lynden-Bell in the 50's and 60's theorised that quasars were, in fact masking black holes and he predicted that black holes would be found at the centre of every galaxy. The author of The Theory had never read his work prior to this broadcast, just as he had no knowledge of the mathematics of the previous programme prior to that broadcast. A good contribution from Dr. Marek Kukula (Royal Greenwich Observatory) discussed our inhibitive point of view but he plotted the path to our own black hole at the centre of the Milky Way. Andrea Ghez (UCLA) combined lasers and software to "see" through the "space dust" and observe our own black hole. In late 2011 in Munich, Dr. Stefan Gillesson observed a large gas cloud very close to this black hole and it appeared that it would soon be devoured by the black hole. Now the narrator says "what happens to the gas cloud inside the black hole we will never know" Shame, once again, no homework. Professor Quataert says "friction causes the gas cloud to heat up and, therefore, spiral in towards the black hole", shame he did not read The Theory and realise the power of gravity of a black hole. Dr. Caleb Scharf (Columbia University, NY) observing the energy near the black hole at the centre of Signus A galaxy is now certain that quasars are really black holes. Doctor John Maggorian (Oxford University), using Hubble, agreed with Narayan that a black hole had a relationship, about 1/2% with it's surrounding galaxy. Professor Andy Fabian (Cambridge University), using an x-ray imager "saw" high density radiation emissions from our own black hole which made the author of The Theory think, hence the addition of "Black Holes and Dark Matter" in the addenda of The Theory, something which the author had known he had to explain more fully. Now we have Caleb Scharf saying "we are all made of stars" and both he and the narrator agree that, somehow, heavy elements from dead stars "found it's way to earth" and we are the result. Shame they did not read The Theory. The final part of the broadcast accepts that black holes are "at the heart of every galaxy and are in control".

    Now we must question the Horizon team, happy to put out a programme to millions of viewers with all that garbage in it, inaccuracies, questions with "no answers" and all the rest of it. The programme does show that, in the 4 years since the first black hole broadcast, science has moved very close to some of the points of view expressed in The Theory, is that down to Horizon or the streamcast? Horizon's last broadcast stated that "quantum physics and Einstein's physics cannot be united" but, if they read The Theory, they will see that it is in harmony with all aspects of todays physics whether micro or macro and is THE ONLY work that does this! Horizon's decision to disregard the work is dangerous to them. As it can be proven that they had 2 years knowledge of the work but chose to broadcast an inaccurate programme, how can the viewers trust their integrity ever again? Is this a management decision to disregard the work because, if it is, and with what we have seen of BBC management recently, maybe it should be reconsidered by someone senior enough to make a good decision. Is it down to the quality of the researchers? Are the research team all school leavers with no experience, no science qualifications but they work for next to nothing so the wages bill looks good? Do you have to be born stupid to become a BBC Horizon team member or do the BBC give special lessons in this skill? It must be stated to the BBC, Horizon and all contributors and their respective universities that the author has in place specific documentary evidence of copyright protection which will stand firm in a court of law so to disregard The Theory is very dangerous. At any point in the future, any "discovery" that proves The Theory or a major point within The Theory will, if not acknowledging it's content or contribution, be liable to aggressive legal pursuit. As always, if you have a "Point of View", please feedback to CB.

Home    Site Map   

Companys Map     Contact CB

The JSC Group March 2006