Hadronic Chemistry

DEFINITION 8.2.1 (patent pending) [l]: Magnecules in gases, liquids, and solids consist of stable clusters composed of conventional molecules, and/or dimers, and/or individual atoms bonded together by opposing magnetic polarizations of the orbits of at least the peripheral atomic electrons when exposed to sufficiently strong external magnetic fields, as well as the polarization of the intrinsic magnetic moments of nuclei and electrons. A population of magnecules constitutes a chemical species when essentially pure, i.e., when molecules or other species are contained in very small percentages in a directly identifiable, form. Magnecules are characterized by, or can be identified via the following, main features:

I) Magnecules primarily exist at large atomic weights where not expected, for instance, at atomic weights which are ten times or more the maximal atomic weight of conventional molecular constituents;

II) Magnecules are characterized by large peaks in macroscopic percentages in mass spectrography, which peaks remain unidentified following a search among all existing molecules;

III) Said peaks admit no currently detectable infrared signature for gases and no ultraviolet signature for liquids other  than those of the conventional molecules and/or dimers constituting the magnecule;

IV) Said infrared and ultraviolet signatures are generally altered (a feature called "mutation") with respect to the conventional versions, thus indicating an alteration (called infrared or ultraviolet mutation) of the conventional structure of dimers generally occurring with additional peaks in the infrared or ultraviolet signatures not existing in conventional configurations;

V) Magnecules have an anomalous adhesion  to other substances, which results in backgrounds (blank) following spectrographic tests which are often similar to the original scans, as well as implying the clogging of small feeding lines with consequential lack of admission into analytic instruments of the most important magnecules to be detected;

VI) Magnecules can break down into fragments under sufficiently energetic collisions, with subsequent recombination with other fragments and/or conventional molecules, resulting in variations in time of spectrographic peaks (called time mutations of magnecular weights);

VII) Magnecules can accrue or lose during collision individual atoms, dimers or molecules;

VIII) Magnecules have an anomalous penetration through other substances indicating a reduction of the average size of conventional molecules as expected under magnetic polarizations;

LX) Gas magnecules have an anomalous solution in liquids due to new magnetic bonds between gas and liquid molecules caused by magnetic induction;

X) Magnecules can be formed by molecules of liquids which are not necessarily solvable in each other;

XI) Magnecules have anomalous average atomic weights in the sense that they are bigger than that of any molecular constituent and any of their combinations;

XII) A gas with magnecular structure does not follow the perfect gas law because the number of its constituents (Avogadro Number), or, equivalently, its average atomic weight, varies with a sufficient variation of the pressure;

XIII) Substances with magnecular structure have anomalous physical characteristics, such as anomalous specific density, viscosity, surface tension, etc., as compared to the characteristics of the conventional molecular constituents;

XIV) Magnecules release in thermochemical reactions more energy than that released by the same reactions among unpolarized molecular constituents;

XV) All the above characteristic features disappear when the magnecules are brought to a sufficiently high temperature, which varies from species to species, called Curie Magnecular Temperature; in particular, combustion eliminates all magnetic anomalies resulting in an exhaust without magnecular features.

Magnecules are also called: elementary when only composed of two molecules; magneplexes when entirely composed of several identical molecules; and magneclusters when composed of several different molecules.

The theoretical and experimental evidence presented in this Chapter establishes that the chemical species of molecules, defined as stable clusters of atoms under a valance bond, does not exhaust all possible chemical species existing in nature.

This conclusion is proved beyond scientific .doubt, for instance, by macroscopic percentage of stable clusters, with atomic weight of several hundreds a.m.u., in light gases without an infrared signature where heaviest possible detected molecule is the CO₂ with 44 a.m.u.; the mutation of transparent oils into a completely opaque substance without fluidity; the joint increase of the specific density for both gaseous and liquid cases; and other evidence.

Needless to say, the final characterization and detection of the new chemical species submitted in Ref. [1] and reviewed in this chapter will require a considerable collegial effort, since the methods presented in this chapter are manifestly preliminary, with the understanding that, again, the existence of the new chemical species is outside scientific doubts.

As a matter of fact, the proposed new chemical species of magnecules, which, according to Definition 8.2.1 includes that of molecules, cannot be considered itself as the final chemical species in nature as it is the fate proved by history for all scientific discoveries.

As an example, the reformulation of magnecules via the hyperstructural branch of hadronic chemistry implies the prediction of the broader chemical species of hypermagnecules which is apparently more suitable to represent living organisms due to its inherent irreversibility, multidimensional structure compatible with our three-dimensional sensory perception, and other features needed for a more adequate representation of the complexities of living organisms. The novelty of this possible species is then an evident consequence of its novel features. Its need is established by the fact that current attempts to decipher the DNA code via the numbers used for molecules and magnecules dating back to biblical times have little chance of success, thus mandating the use of broader numbers, such as the hypernumbers and related multi-dimensional structures.

All in all, we can safely conclude that science is a discipline which will never admit final theories.

Here you have the complete table of contents for Foundations of Hadronic Chemistry:

http://www.i-b-r.org/docs/sanbook.pdf

A complete Russian translation of the book, as well as some other crucial scientific publications related to magnecules, is available here:

http://www.i-b-r.org/ir00022.htm

The superconductive properties of the substances that Santilli describes is an established scientific fact, confirmed by independent laboratories and rigorous experimental protocols and by verification of scientific predictions, extensively published and without the emergence of any single publication doubting or criticizing any of this.

Santilli recently published the book "Isodual Theory of Antimatter: with applications to Antigravity, Grand Unification and Cosmology" at Springer. This book gives an overview of the scientific extensions as a whole from a 30 year long tremendous scientific undertaking. The old problem of "unified field theory" is here solved with the necessary field equations, and named "iso-grand-unification", bringing the four forces, as well as the fifth in the iso-electron (Cooper-pair), together in a universal formula. This required way more advanced mathematics than available to Einstein and to quantum mechanics.

The AXIOMS of special relativity and quantum mechanics are still used, but these are REALIZED in a much more abstract, powerful, unitary and broader theory. Of course, all what relativity theory and quantum mechanics COULD explain from their simplified assumptions of point-particles, non-contact forces etc., is still explained inside the more general, extended and lifted theory. But the new theory can explain a lot MORE; it removes the inconsistencies both inside QM and relativity theory as well as between them, and it establishes a new and much more realistic overall map of the physical universe.

Before this publication, there was no established scientific theory about anti-matter, the old theories were only concerned about the assumed minor issue of the negative sign of the forth gamma matrix of the Dirac equation, and making some ad hoc assumptions to explain away the inconveniencies of the positron. Santilli and his co-workers have established a highly mature and experimentally supported UNIFIED theory of matter and anti-matter, on all levels from elementary particles to galaxies, the two states being given equal significance in the physical universe as a whole, and corresponding to two complementary spaces co-existing in the SAME space in an overlaid design. What is matter in one universe, APPEARS as anti-matter in the complementary twin universe, and the same with negative vs. positive energy and negative vs. positive time flow. The equations for the PROJECTIONS of matter into anti-matter in the complementary space are worked out in the book, as well as for so-called iso-selfdual bound states which are COMBINATIONS of matter and anti-matter.

The ONTOLOGICAL implications of these advances are tremendous. Here there are not any more assumptions about space curvature, black holes, big bang, mysteriously missing energy in the universe and so on. For the universe as a unitary whole of the two spaces of matter and anti-matter, negative and positive energy, positive and negative time arrow, thermodynamic entropy and negentropy cancels out to zero. At the same time, consistent with the grandiose theory of nilpotent vacuum and universal rewrite system worked out by mathematical physicist Peter Rowlands, matter is explained as GENERATING from the "zero" field / vacuum / ether. Santilli worked out the mathematics and the equations to EXPLAIN gravitation and masses from the electromagnetism of vacuum/ether, lifting quantum electro dynamics to astrophysics, the apparent autonomy of gravitation then disappearing as just an intermediate construction.

Of course you have had other candidates for a unified field theory, too; perhaps the most advanced the set of equations from Myron Evans (the scientist with most publications in the world; not as many pages as Santilli though). But you have never had even CANDIDATES for a unified field theory which has included the FIFTH force constituting magnecules/ORMUS. (Quantum chemistry has no METHODS to describe CONTACT forces from EXTENDED (and deforming) particles, only the four NON-contact forces between simplistic assumptions of point particles, obviously impotent for understanding of hadrons and the physics of stars).

And, just as important: you have never had any candidate for a unified field theory including ANTI-MATTER, and even less recognizing the balanced existence of matter and anti-matter in the physical universe at ALL SCALES (cf. the complementarity of the two anu-spins from koilon) as NILPOTENT. Further, there do not exist any other candidates for a unified field theory having to disposition the necessary advanced mathematics - i.e. iso-, geno- and hypernumbers - to even DESCRIBE a unitary relation between a matter universe and an anti-matter universe. A pretended unified field theory that is not an ISO-unified theory CANNOT be a unified field theory. For example: The understanding of the iso-electron and hence superconductivity REQUIRES the notion of the isofolded structure of matter and anti-matter space - hence nothing mystical about ORMUS substances disappearing out of our space, since this is an iso-dual bound state - without this insight, the equations and predictions for experiment will be WRONG.

Hence, there do not EXIST any other serious candidates for a unified field theory about the physical universe than Santilli's. Serious scientists and laymen go right ahead to the MOST advanced theory that exists, and judge additional important information from that, understanding that the social ecology of scientists produce a lot of genius envy and power play disinformation to lead attention away from what is REALLY the most advanced.

And with this theory now established, there is not any mystery anymore about speeds above light velocities (already proved in many experiments), anti-gravity (which relativity theory blocked out), time machines (space invariant), space time machines, etc. The necessary ontology for this is now established, and the sufficient equations are worked out in rigorous detail (equations that are not POSSIBLE to create without Santilli numbers, just as quantum physics needed complex numbers one century ago).

This is just a short sketch of the proportions of this theory. Many practical applications are also suggested.

If you put hydrogen magnecule gas in a fuel tank, the car runs 7.47 times the distance on the same tank volume and pressure compared to a car driven by hydrogen molecule gas. Hadronic chemistry can explain this with detailed equations, quantum chemistry not at all, not acknowledging the fifth force of nature, and not recognizing the possibility of transmutations from molecules to magnecules in hadronic eco-reactors. Obviously, they can not make unified field theories about forces they do not know about. And in the magnecule exhaust there are ZERO potentially carcinogenic substances (about 5000 thousands for molecular combustion), CO2 level is 40 percent down and OXYGEN is delivered from the clean exhaust (12-16%), totally unexplainable from quantum mechanics. These are not facts of technology and science of just academic interest.

One of many aspects here is the question of increased oxygen depletion in tandem with CO2 increase in the atmosphere. The relative proportion of the oxygen decrease is of course much less and not that immediately alarming as the CO2 increase, but due to the nature of air currents in big cities this already seems to be an issue to consider locally, implementation of hadronic eco-reactors in China to clean up the air (and other vast pollution) already being a serious concern, stirring up turbulence (due to power interests linked to the old stream paradigm of physics, and other issues). Cf.

http://belairsky.com/escive_dl/uploads/Chenny_new_energy_road_paper_march06.pdf

and:

http://www.chinainfo.gov.cn/data/200408/1_20040824_87030.html

a paper on a Chinese government site arguing use of magnecular technology for ecological reasons.

I read a bunch of papers trying to figure out the truth about the so-called global greening, industrialists and most scientists arguing that the net effect of CO2 increase in the atmosphere is global greening, because the increase makes plants and forests grow more than the parallel deficit in biomass from the ongoing massive slaughter of rain forests. However, I came across an article published by Russian scientists that argued the quite opposite with dramatically different calculations and estimates, global greening not at all being the case.

Without having time to sort out all the details here, my impression was that the Russians were closer to the truth than the main stream ecosystem analyzers. This is also more aligned with the layman's intuition, finding it strange that the net effect shall be global greening in spite of the rain forests shrinking. In complex issues with high risks at stake it is way much better to tread carefully in stead of trusting that "Gaia" will clean herself anyway, so we can just go on with exploitation.  Hence, the issue of oxygen depletion should also be considered with care, and with a principal support of magnecular technology being able to enhance the oxygen level in the atmosphere, most important at lower altitude and in big cities.

Article about magnecular technology and oxygen depletion by Santilli:

http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0009014

Hadronic chemistry is not a one-man undertaking, in spite of Santilli being the most prominent of these scientists, but a result of an effort by cutting-edge scientists world wide to create the necessary extensions of mathematics (iso-, geno- and hypermathematics), physics (hadronic mechanics), and chemistry. Without the new dramatic extensions of mathematics and physics, hadronic chemistry would never have been established, and magnecules never been predicted and discovered from THEORETICAL scientific advances.

There is a bibliography counting 731 publications in hadronic science, i.e. post-quantum and post-relativity science available as a pdf-file below point 14 at this page:

http://www.i-b-r.org/Hadronic-Mechanics.htm

The discovery of magnecules is one of MANY new results resulting from these GENERAL extensions of mathematics, physics and chemistry to a huge and coherent scientific building.

The two most important magnecule/superconductivity scientists next to Santilli are the quite distinguished - even by main stream criteria - physics professors Animalu (Nigeria) and Aringazin (Kazakhstan).

The classic breakthrough article establishing the advanced scientific theory of superconductivity (including in fluids and gases) from hadronic mechanics is:

Animalu: Isosuperconductivity: A nonlocal-nonHamiltonian theory of pairing in High-Tc Superconducitivity. Hadronic Journal, volume 17, 349-427 (1994).

However, some of this approach was presented already in Animalu's article in Hadronic Journal, volume 14, pp 451 (1991).

Hadronic Journal, volume 21, no. 6, 1998, was a special issue dedicated to hadronic chemistry. This included the publication of the first scientific article presenting magnecules, namely Santilli's "Theoretical prediction and experimental verification of the new chemical species of magnecules", pp 789-894. Cf.

http://www.hadronicpress.com/hadronic_journal.htm

A quote from the 1994 iso-superconductivity article by Animalu:

***
The applications of the isominkowskian geometry are numerous (-) One application is particulary suggestive to be mentioned here. Consider the case of sea shells with a minimum of structural complexity, e. g. at least one sectional bifurcation, as described by Illert (-). These creatures can be observed with our naked eyes and therefore appear to grow in our space-time. The fact that this is not the case has been established via computer simulations which show that the shells should crack during their growth in our space-time. However, the same shells can grow regularly if treated via Santilli's isogeomtetries (-). The use of the isogeometries also solves other mysteries of shells' evolution, such as the need for discontinuous jumps into negative times to represent the topologies of certain bifurcations, which can be instead continuously represented via Santilli's isounits (-).

This example established that systems which are perceived with our eyes as belonging to our own geometry, can belong in reality to much more complex geometries. The studies of this paper indicate that electron pairing in superconductivity is precisely of the latter type. Because of extended use, we are accustomed to perceiving electrons as belonging to the conventional Minkowski space. Yet, their pairing with an attractive coupling despite their repulsive electric interactions indicates instead that they can well belong to a much more complex isogeometry. (p395-396)
***

Animalu also mentions that our perception betrays us to perceive what is a perfect light cone when seen in hyperspace as a deformed cone in our Euclidian world, and a circle in isospace as an ellipse (p. 394). This is consistent with many formulations in other publications by Santilli himself, as well as other hadronic scientists.

Hence, the Animalu-Santilli theory of superconductivity has its foundation in a geometric LIFTING (made possible by Santilli's extensions of earlier mathematics and his development of  iso-Euclidian geometry) to a certain hyperspace ABOVE 3D, which is claimed to be the real "anchoring" to understand superconductivity. And THIS is the only scientific theory about superconductivity being able to explain superconductivity by REALLY high temperatures, including biological systems, and able to develop successful technology to produce such superconductive substances (magnecules).

Chris Illert's work is extremely important with regard to the anchoring in hyperspace. Also, Chris Illert is the only really advanced scientist having developed new theories in atomic physics with explanatory power drawing heavily on the observations from occult chemistry. However, the integration of hadronic chemistry and technology with occult chemistry and the results established by ORMUS researchers, still remains to be done. Illert himself has not yet put effort into this, in spite of his pioneering research in hadronic biology. I think Illert would be the best suited scientist in the world to clarify all this, perhaps the only one. I place Illert in the uppermost elite of living genius, along with Santilli, Rowlands, Pitkanen, and Trell (and Gariaev).

Illert's two volumes "Alchemy today" explain atomic physics from hadronic circuits and occult chemistry, and from this he is able to calculate the different binding energies. Illert's theory is in excellent agreement with experiment.

In spite of Illert having proved the existence of a real 6D hyperspace, as well as non-trivial time travel of information, the overall flavor of Illert's work is highly demystifying and revealing quite simple generative patterns of nature, contrary to the growing surrealistic mysticism of impotent quantum mechanics.

Despite their immense importance, most of Illert's publications are not easy to get hold of. Some of them are published in very limited amount of copies and not by prestigious publishing houses. There are many paradoxes in the modern cutting edge knowledge ecology.

In his text "Occult chemistry's prediction of adyarium, element zero, the tetra-neutron", Illert presents a comparison of the different levels of matter in occult chemistry and modern physics (fig. 1, p. 2). It goes as follows:

E1 (anu): sub-quark level particles, or astral matter, in left and right-handed varieties.

E2: quark-level particles, of 12 different types, 6 quarks and 6 anti-quarks, each smaller than 10^-18 cms.

E3: vector (spinning) and scalar (non-spinning) mesons of approximate length 0,6x10^-13 cms. Spinning stretches the vector meson.

E4: nucleons such as the proton and neutron with approximate radius 0.9x10^-13 cms.

Three quarks on a triple-ended elastics (Nambu) string.

E5: the gas,

E6: the liquid,

E7: and solid phases of nuclear matter, as it exists in atomic nuclei with radii upto about 10^-12 cms.

(E1-E7 representing the corresponding levels of matter in occult chemistry)

With regard to the work of Phillips, Illert gives him credit with regard to understanding of the finest/lowest/microscopic level of matter (E1-E4), but not at the higher levels (E3-E7). Illert gives a reference to the following publication pointing out the mistakes by Phillips in this regard:

M.G. Hocking: "A model for ESP observation of atoms and molecules", part 1 in Bulletin of the Theosophical Science Study Group (India), volume 21, pp 53-62; part 2 in same journal, volume 22, pp 5-9.

The volumes of "Alchemy today" is - to my knowledge - the only scientific work ever written working out the correspondences between modern physics/chemistry and occult chemistry at levels E3-E7 and offering a theory to explain these correspondences.

Here are links to the magnecule related Santilli patents:

With regard to hyper-magnecules, mentioned in the "Concluding Remarks" from Santilli's book, I am not aware of any scientific publication yet describing their structure or presenting experimental verification. There is a huge cleft between old stream quantum mechanics believing superconductivity to be restricted to physical systems far below zero degrees, and hadronic mechanics and chemistry stating superconductivity as taking place also in physical systems at room temperature and far beyond, and as a normal state of affairs for biological systems.

Hadronic chemistry presupposes the acknowledgement of the fifth force of nature, the contact force in the iso-electron constituting magnecules. Unification of the four forces known until 1998 can therefore not constitute any complete theory, not even for physical systems.

From the attributes of magnecules it seems obvious that many of the ORMUS substances are identical with these. On the other hand ORMUS also seems to include some substances with additional anomalous attributes, and this may correspond to hyper-magnecules. It would be very useful if researchers in the ORMUS community could clarify the correlations to magnecules in precise detail.