Lifeboat Foundation

“I do not understand the Telemach theorem but I feel it is too simple to be possibly correct; yet please, do not mention my name.” ‘t Hooft and Hawking join-in in the loud silence.

Hereby the existence of a highly sophisticated version of Telemach, found independently by a high-ranking academic, is kept from the media. It is known to CERN and would take years to discuss. I therefore support his continuing on outside the limelight.

Dear, venerable CERN: Please, make a 4-week pause immediately to give Telemach a chance to be put to rest. Nothing would make his father and the planet more happy. I publicly offer a bet to Stephen Hawking that he will not succeed in this task. If I lose I shall write a preface to his next book.

A big institution that does not object that what it is doing can evaporate the earth in a few years’ time cannot refuse answering much longer.

“Why, then, would the Bundestag be disallowed to discuss CERN for the reason that the issue is already before the UN Security Council?”, I replied.

Nonetheless he has a point: I apparently have got to respond to Karl Hiltpolt’s and John Baez’s public assaults since at least one of them is endowed with a good name in science.

It is true that my often having an urgent undertone in my voice is at odds with all known journalistic rules. Such no-no behavior immediately costs you all public attention — it is obvious that I never took a media course. And even worse, 3 years ago I called on the International Court of Crimes Against Humanity (who would not reply). My excuse was the extinction of humankind risked by CERN’s not admitting the scientific safety conference logically required in the face of new evidence. Such an act is automatically perceived by the media as un-reportable.

So it is probably my fault that the incriminated LHC experiment could be switched on twice, the first time with a local disaster, the second time without fanfares two years after.

Continue reading “My Journalist Friend Thinks I Have No Chance Against Two Well-Funded Hate Blogs” »

Compiled on 24 Sep 2011

Human Rights Council
Eighteenth session
Agenda item 1
Human rights situations that require the Council’s attention
Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the situation of human rights in all countries

High Assembly:

Every child’s life is being consciously attacked by a hilarious group of scientists at a Swiss town well known to many members of the United Nations – Geneva.

Continue reading “ReliefWeb Briefing Kit for UN General Assembly + Gender” »

but now you question Einstein’s whole theory while continuing to refuse a scientific safety conference that could save the planet if he was right.

Were it not for the latter dark cloud, everyone would find this childish behavior cute — an ingenious plot.

Time is ripe to admit the long requested Einstein conference before the LHC can go on.

Everyone feels so now.

From: Otto E. Rossler
To: “[email protected]“
Cc: “[email protected]“
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2011 10:18 PM local time
Subject: Call for help

Dear Mr. Secretary of State Westerwelle, Esq.:

No one on the planet in a high position in science or politics or the media believes me that I have given a proof which implies that the “safety conference” requested by the Cologne Administrative Court on January 27, 2011 is necessary immediately.

My excuse is that not a single scientist on the planet openly contradicts the Telemach theorem on which the proof of danger is based. (Telemach was the son of Ulysses, but TeLeMaCh also means the essence of Einstein’s early main result on gravity.)

Continue reading “Call for Help” »

There is growing recognition that the Moon is the logical next step for sustainably opening space to human settlement. It is now confirmed that both lunar poles contain appreciable quantities of ice containing water and also carbon and nitrogen containing compounds. Since the Moon is always only a 3-day trip away, it easily beats low-gravity asteroids as the most economic place to mine water ice. Similarly, since the Moon has only a 3-second roundtrip communications delay, teleoperated robots could mine and process the lunar ice at a fraction of what human miners would cost. That ice, brought back to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) could establish a new space economy including on-orbit refueling, boosting large communications satellites to GEO, sending tourists around or even to the Moon, and facilitating NASAs Beyond Earth Orbit activities. So the Moon is a great place to develop economic in-space resources.

But, what does all of this do with survival?

Amongst those people who understand extinction risks to humanity, it is generally recognized that an off-Earth, self-sufficient colony would go a very long ways to ensuring the survival of humanity as a species. An orbiting colony would not be a good choice because, if the Earth’s biosphere were contaminated with an ecophage, the Earth itself would not anymore be a source of supplies, and Earth orbit contains no resources except for sunlight. Mars, an asteroid, or a distant moon could be a location for an off-Earth colony, but all of these would be considerably more expensive to establish than on the Moon. For those of us who think it prudent that we should purchase “insurance” against the extinction of humanity sooner rather than later, the least expensive location makes the most sense. So the Moon is a great place to establish a colony for the purpose of survival.

Interesting, so the Moon is the best place for both economics and survival. Perhaps the two could be combined into a single program. But, in the Age of Austerity, it is unlikely that our governments are going to fund a large new space program. So how can this be done economically?

Continue reading “Economics and Survival: An In-space 2-for-1 Bargain” »

Dear UNGA:

The Security Council may have informed you about the fact that a Cologne court asked the German government – and implicitly you – to immediately order a “safety conference” because there is scientific evidence that the LHC experiment at CERN is currently producing miniature black holes that it (1) cannot detect and which (b) can shrink the earth to 2 cm in perhaps 5 years’ time.

Signed: Otto E. Rossler, Nobel prize candidate

Please, sacrifice a minute of your precious time to show your chaos colleague at Tubingen where the error lies in his generalization of Einstein’s seminal T-theorem (gravitational clock slow-down), the T-L-M-Ch theorem.

The latter says that besides the gravitational clock slowdown T, there is a proportional gravitational length increase L (invisible from above), a proportional gravitational rest-mass-energy decrease M, and a proportional gravitational charge decrease Ch. ( http://www.wissensnavigator.com/documents/einsteins-equivale…t-l-m-.pdf )

The three corollaries to Einstein’s T radically change the properties of black holes. For example, black holes become undetectable to CERN’s detectors if successfully produced there – for instance, at this very moment.

The world public sees that no single scientist on the planet contradicts me but all scientists support CERN. This is a volatile situation. I think now is the time that the Nobel committee name a defender of CERN’s while the underground cannons in Geneva pause.