NEW Micro Black holes, accelerated by unstable swinging gas tails. A new black hole paradigm is needed to understand universal complexity.

What is the physics behind falling and raising micro Comets if they are in fact micro black holes? The growing gas tails should be responsible for this effect.

If by magnetic interference micro black holes are able to emerge around the earth and the sun, they are expected to start as "naked" singularities without a gas tail, and going down by gravity of the earth or sun.

However, if a gas bubble round this singularity has emerged, keeping a comfortable distance to the singularities nucleus by the Fermion repulsion horizon, then this gas bubble has the tendency to form a tail which points into the direction of the gravity origin.

As a result, this tail will push the micro black hole UP and away from the gravity origin!

Saturn's icy/spongy moon Hyperion,

the remains of a former Comet?

The globular inner structure of the ruptured icy moon Hyperion tells us the story of an old Comet left alone by its New Micro Black hole of creation.

It also is a strong evidence of the Fermion repelling horizon and complete atomic H2 production around NEW (micro) black holes, if the vacuum structure of our matterial universe, has a chiral preference for matter over anti matter .

see: http://migratingblackholes.blogspot.com/2009/03/new-hawking-radiation-of-new-micro.html

'Sigmoids' are S-shaped structures on the sun's surface. A new example of ZPE COSMIC ELECTRIC GENERATION between pairing black holes?

'Sigmoids' are S-shaped structures that appear intermittently on the sun's surface. Many produce eruptions of hot ionised gas, or plasma, such as coronal mass ejections and flares.
( NewScientist)
According to the new black hole paradigm, are Sigmoids a good example of PAIRING SUNSPOTS or mini black holes and the origin of Cosmic electric generators using the vacuum ZPE (Zero Point Energy) as propellant.
Such a FREE ENERGY generator is first recognized inside the Cygnus-A , Zwicky 18 and in Herbig Haro systems. see:
http://bigbang-entanglement.blogspot.com/2007/01/new-interpretation-of-cygnus-will-lead.html

This is also a support for the new scale independent new black hole paradigm.
http://bigbang-entanglement.blogspot.com/2007/02/higgs-vacuum-energy-lensing-effect-and.html

As a consequence, electric currents should flow (as electron jets) along the S shape from the center of the S, into the two mini black holes located at both ends of the S.

Sungrazers and other mini Comets are supposed to be originated by the field interference of Sunspots.
The Sunspot x-ray- and magnetic field interference should be the real origin of the formation of micro black holes produced by this system, in the form of small Comets or Sungrazers.
Original article by NewScientist:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16999-sigmoids-on-the-sun-could-help-predict-space-storms.html

PROPOSAL FOR FUTURE DUAL MICRO BLACK HOLE ELECTRIC ENERGY USAGE.

ELECTRIC ENERGY PRODUCTION AROUND MACRO BLACK HOLES.

CYGNUS A GALAXY (STAR CLUSTER)

HOW IS OSCILLATING HIGGS SPACE ACTIVE AROUND TWO BLACK HOLES/

.

New gravity model: DOUBLE LE SAGE gravity or HIGGS-GRAVITON pushing gravity.

Double Le Sage Gravity has two different pushing components (Higgs and Gravitons) both combined in the form of two vector bundles with hedgehog shape or Hedgehog vector bundle manifolds.

According to Quantum FFF theory: “Nothing sucks in physics.” 

First we have the oscillating Higgs particles oscillating along the edges of the tetrahedral lattice with the Planck scale, causing the so called Casimir effect and a part of the gravity.
All Fermions (so all mass) are radiating gravitons, which are a collision product of Higgs particles with Fermions. The Higgs particle changes form after this collision and travels with the speed of light away from the fermion.
Fermions are supposed to have a real FORM, they have a propeller form, able to spin in two directions by the impulses of the Higgs field.
Gravitons are assumed to have LESS pushing effect if they collide with Fermions han Higgs particles have.

As a consequence, the incoming Higgs particle pressure from outside a massive
object like the earth is larger than the Higgs–Graviton mixture pressure going out of the Earth. That is why the apple falls.
It is assumed that black holes are not able to radiate photons and even gravitons.

As a result a black hole has only incoming Higgs pressure at its horizon and the nucleus of the black hole is assumed to absorb the Higgs particles and the vacuum lattice at the same time. Space distortion is the result and even the change of speed of light. The edges of the lattice are elongated into the direction of the black hole and shortened perpendicular to it.

Globular vector bundle hedgehog to shows the complexity of gravity.

Double LE SAGE Gravity, originated by the combined scattering influence of Higgs pressure (3)(Casimir) and Graviton pressure (6) in the form of a vector Hedgehog. This vector Hedgehog is a basic element in the next explanation for well documented gravity anomalies.

The total Higgs pressure from outside acting on a mass like the earth, is larger than the Higgs pressure coming from the inside of that mass, because inside the earth, many Higgs particles are assumed to have changed by collision with Fermions into Gravitons.

Gravitons are supposed to originate less scattering pressure on Fermions than Higgs particles.

As a conequence, the double Le Sage gravity is supposed to be the result of the mutual scattering (push) influence of the oscillating local Higgs Field- together with the local Graviton scattering on Fermions.

The complicated Solar gravity system seems to be responsible for three in principle different kinds of gravity eclipse variations found by scientists.

The variations can be explained by the hypothesis that sunspots are micro black holes, which have a gravity lensing effect on the Higgs vacuum pressure. The Polar rotation of these sunspots combined with the sunspot cycle of 11 yearsm, seem to create an anti-symmetrical extra double- or dual Le Sage gravity effect. Both effects, are supposed to be responsible for the remarkable seemingly unpredictable differences in the gravity variations during Solar eclipses. See for details also: http://migratingblackholes.blogspot.com/2009_03_01_archive.html

Double LeSage gravity solutions for the Solar Eclipse Gravity anomalies found by Wang and Yang/ Mishra and Rao.

Solar eclipse gravity anomalies explained by comparison of;
Woomera 2002. Lusaka 2001, Mohe 1997, and Dhoraji 1995 gravity measurement results, compared with the Sunspot distribution in those years and the double LeSage gravity proposed by the Quantum FFF theory.
For the Double LeSage gravity in Quantum FFF theory see:
http://vixra.org/pdf/1103.0024v2.pdf

http://bigbang-entanglement.blogspot.com/

SIMPLIFIED SOLUTIONS (below) for comparable examples:

DOUBLE Le Sage gravity could solve the Wang and Yang eclipse anomalies.
The Wang and Yang eclipse gravity anomalies (Mohe 1997 and Lusaka 2001) can be explained by the introduction of a dual or double Le Sage gravity system.
Such a system is supposed to be based on the pressure differences between the impulse of Higgs and Graviton scattering on Fermions.
The concentrated Higgs- Graviton (vector) bundles have two types : A and B. They seem to introduce a lighthouse effect around the Sun.
Bundles with type A seem to be more concentrated and related to the equatorial plane of the Sun. Type A bundles seem to loose their influence on Earth if the inclination of the Sun with the line of sight is increasing. It is proposed that type A gravity is originated by the rotation of the Sun (drag effect)
Gravity bundles with type B (only Higgs without graviton influence) seem to be more widely beaming without much variation related to inclination with the line of sight.
It is proposed that type B gravity is originated by the dark matter content of Sunspots. ( Sunspots are assumed to be micro black holes, so sunspots are black holes! and Comets are black holes too!)

See for eclipse gravity variations:
Maurice Allais homepage:
http://www.allais.info/priorartdocs/angs.htm

see also: Newscientist: "does gravity change with the seasons" http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20227046.500-does-gravity-change-with-the-seasons.html

3x Solar eclipse gravity variations explained by a double LE SAGE effect and massless micro black holes. (Sunspots)

The double Le Sage gravity is supposed to be the result of the mutual scattering (push) influence of the oscillating local Higgs Field- together with the local Graviton scattering on Fermions.

The special equatorial Solar gravity seems to be responsible for three in principle different kinds of gravity eclipse variations found by different scientists.
This can be explained by the hypothesis that sunspots (you remember: massless micro black holes) have a gravity lensing affect on the Higgs vacuum (coined: B) and the Polar rotation of these sunspots also seem to create an anti-symmetrical extra double- or dual Le Sage gravity effect. (coined: A)
Both effects A and B, seem to be responsible for the remarkable differences in the gravity variations during Solar eclipses.

Alternative HAWKING RADIATION of (MICRO) BLACK HOLES

If we accept the Quantum mechanical idea of the vacuum creation of Lepton pairs around a black holes, then only a minimal amount of (anti-)Leptons is supposed to be annihilated in the Comet case.
This is possible if the vacuum Higgs lattice has a chiral structure in combination with an opposite chirality for Leptons and Fermions!
As a result “left handed” chiral Positrons tend to "absorb" easier and more Gluons/Photons than Electrons do inside a “left handed” chiral vacuum.
Positrons seem to be able to form positive Quarks by "click-on" Gluon/Photon absorption. This "click-on" system facilitate Electrons to form negative charged Quarks.
This simple principle solves even the well known Big Bang anti-matter annihilation problem!
As a result, COMETS are spongy icy H2 balls created around micro black holes by the Quark Gluon plasma producing Black Hole horizon.

see also: http://bigbang-entanglement.blogspot.com/

As a result, the positron has better chances to become a stable QUARK (by photon/gluon addition) than the electron. see: The CPT symmetric Multiverse by black hole Big Bang evaporation:

http://bigbang-entanglement.blogspot.com/2007/03/backreaction-lee-smolins-trouble-with.html

To understand Micro black hole (MBH) characteristics we seem to need a new Hawking radiation model.

For particle models, see:

http://bigbang-entanglement.blogspot.com/2007/01/introduction.html

According to this model, Micro black holes are supposed to show up as Ball lightning, Comets and Herbig Haro objects.

The NEW Hawking radiation presented here, goes back to 1973.
Soviet scientists Yakov Zeldovich and Alexander Starobinsky showed Hawking in 1973, that according to the quantum mechanical uncertainty principle, rotating black holes should create and emit particles.
My interpretation of the Higgs vacuum is that Black holes don't need rotation to repell all particles created by vacuum fluctuations due to their propeller structure and are even able to form QUARKS BY A NEW STANDARD MODEL of "click-on"photons/Gluons.
see: http://bigbang-entanglement.blogspot.com/
Conclusion both QUARKS ( d and u) are created all together with electrons and positrons.

Hydroxyl (OH), Hydrogen and even complete water molecules seem to be possible as is found in Comets. This production of water by the micro black hole is supposed to be the real compensation for the continuous loss of water molecules by Comets.
Conclusion: Comets harbour micro black holes in their nuclei.
X-ray and even annihilation radiation effects are also a logic result of Comets. However, no annihilation radiation is found related to Comets untill now.

ARE COMETS MICRO BLACK HOLES WITH a dirty snowball cover and a NUCLEAR X-RAY PRODUCTION?

The "Deep impact" of july 2005 on Comet Temple 1.

National Geographic newsletter. 4 april 2006.

Scientists are stumped by the behavior of the comet Tempel 1 after NASA sent the Deep Impact space probe hurtling into it last year some 83 million miles (133.5 million kilometers) from Earth.
The flare that resulted from the July 4 2005 collision was originally measured by optical telescopes as being a weak, five-day-long burst.

This suggested that only a small amount of water and other material had been released after impact.

But an analysis of x-ray images taken after the collision indicates that the flare lasted for a full 12 days and released about 250,000 tons (226,800 metric tons) of water in the form of ice-covered dust grains.

"There was disappointment that Deep Impact didn't cause a major optical outburst, but it did cause an x-ray outburst. Why that is, we don't know,'' said Dick Willingale, an astronomer at the University of Leicester in England whose team operated NASA's Swift X-Ray Telescope.

Willingate's team is puzzled as to why the x-ray observations of the impact's aftermath do not match the observations made by optical telescopes.

"When everyone said it was over, we were [actually] at the peak. We were just taking the data,'' Willingale said. "We realized we had something strange happen, but we didn't understand why.

"The important thing is [the flare] lasted for 12 days,'' Willingale continued. "It shouldn't have done that. The water was coming off so fast, it should've disappeared after a day or so. We don't know why [the strong x-rays] persisted for so long.!!

see: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/04/0404_060404_deep_impact.html

The solution could be: that the deep impact made a temporary hole in the Comet crusty surface and uncovered the micro black hole x-ray radiation produced by the micro-Black hole Hydroxyl production around the nucleus.


THE FIRST X-RAY DISCOVERY OF COMETS.

X-Rays from Comet LINEAR Credit: Carey Lisse (STScI/UMD) et al., CXC, SAO, NASA
Explanation: Why do comets emit X-rays? First discovered during the passing of Comet Hyakutake in 1996, the reason a cold comet would produce hot X-rays has since remained a mystery. On July 14 2000, however, the orbiting Chandra X-ray Observatory was able to provide an image of passing Comet LINEAR, shown above, in enough detail to unravel the mystery. The key to the solution turns out to be the unusual wind of fast ions emitted by our Sun. These ions apparently collide with gas recently emitted by the comet and cause some ions to acquire a new electron. An electron that starts in a high-energy state will emit an X-ray as it falls in closer to the ion nucleus. As other comets move into the inner Solar System, this discovery should allow future study of the continually evolving gas cloud that surrounds comets as well as the composition of the solar wind.

THE MOST RECENT X-RAY OBSERVATION OF A COMET:
NASA SWIFT spots Lulin Comet: see:
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/swift/bursts/lulin.html
This image of Comet Lulin taken Jan. 28 2009, merges data acquired by Swift's Ultraviolet/Optical Telescope (blue and green) and X-Ray Telescope (red). At the time of the observation, the comet was 99.5 million miles from Earth and 115.3 million miles from the sun. Credit: NASA/Swift/Univ. of Leicester/Bodewits et al.

THE GRAIN PARTICLES OF COMET WILD 2.

About 10 percent of the mass of Wild 2 is estimated to be from particles transported out from hot inner zones to the cold zone where the comet formed. Researchers conclude that this is how these grains with unusual isotope ratios go incorporated into a comet.

Earlier research showed that the comet formed in the Kuiper Belt, outside the orbit of Neptune, and only recently entered the inner regions of the solar system.

But during its lifetime, Wild 2 gathered material that formed much closer to the sun.
http://www.topnews.in/parts-comet-wild-2-formed-close-sun-211382

This is an indication that Comets are not formed in the Kuiper belt but simply by solar interference and after black hole creation an Solar evaporating of its dirty ice nucleus will split and dye out like the Schoemaker comet.
From July 16 through July 22, 1994, pieces of an object designated as Comet P/Shoemaker-Levy 9 collided with Jupiter.

Do (micro) black holes extract energy from the vacuum?

Is there a future possibility to extract energy from the vacuum?
Is harnessing ball lightning perhaps the solution for our energy problem on Earth.
One of the most involved persons on this issue is Jack Sarfatti.
His latest paper is the next one:
The emergence of gravity etc. etc. Authors: Jack Sarfatti, Creon Levit (Submitted on 31 Jan 2009) http://arxiv.org/abs/0902.0032
Abstract: We present a model for the origin of gravity, dark energy and dark matter: Dark energy and dark matter are residual pre-inflation false vacuum random zero point energy (w=-1) of large-scale negative, and short-scale positive pressure, respectively, corresponding to the "zero point" (incoherent) component of a superfluid (supersolid) ground state. Gravity, in contrast, arises from the 2nd order topological defects in the post-inflation virtual "condensate" (coherent) component.
For my personal contribution for a Higgs vacuum driven electron pump, see my book and pages 92-96:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1409210316/ref=sib_dp_ptu#reader-link
type: 92 in the search engine box and click on "page 92" to find more.

Micro Black Holes are everywhere, inside Sunspots, Comets, Ball Lightning and even Herbig Haro objects

Based on observation of the ball lightning photo of mr. van Overhagen, the Langmuir video of fireball producing Sprites and the Sungrazer Comets, we may conclude that there are at least three ways of micro black hole production possible, leading to the existence of ball lightning, small Comets and large Comets.
1: Three-wave interference of ordinary lightning into ball lightning (see Overhagen photo)
2. Three wave interference of Sprite lightning into bigger ball lightning or small Comets ( see the Langmuir video)
3. Three wave interference of Stellar Electro magnetic eruptions into small and large Comets. The evidence of EM and x-rays is clearly found in this video:

http://www.livescience.com/common/media/video/player.php?videoRef=250407Sun_outburst

The fact that we observe very few ball lightning around strong lightning activity, is reason to assume that not only magnetic or electric energy but also x-ray interference energy is at stake.

(Message to the cyclesi group)

Thank you Bill for this new elongated LANMUIR LAB. video, because it tells me a crucial fact more than the shorter Langmuir video of the Sprite I had before.
It tells me that at the end of the down falling Sprite fireballs they GO UPWARDS!!!! Which supports my small Comet proposal:

See the new longer video:

http://www.livescience.com/common/media/video/player.php?videoRef=080607sprites

HYPERION the spongy but icy comet remains, abandoned by its nuclear micro black hole, has become a moon of Saturn.

see also:http://bigbang-entanglement.blogspot.com/2006/02/ball-lightning-or-small-comet-pulsar.html

MAGNETIC-X-RAY INTERFERENCE AS THE ORIGIN OF ALL BALL LIGHTNING AND COMETS

(DOUBLE CLICK FOR ENLARGEMENT)

The idea of the origin of natural and artificial ball lightning or small Comets, is that ONLY the postulated three-wave interference mechanism including at least one x-gamma ray component is needed to form a real particle KNOT inside the oscillating new Higgs vacuum lattice.
This KNOT ( or micro black hole) seems to be able to produce a macro CASIMER effect and violate the second law of thermodynamics by the Fermion repelling horizon.
I have no knowledge of measured x-gamma-ray production around artificial or natural ball lightning.
I only have knowledge of the fact that Comets sometimes emit x-rays and even have signs of anti matter annihilation.
These effects are in line with my new (micro) black hole theory.
The production of x-rays inside lightning strokes is well known and first observed by J.R.Dwyer, see:
http://my.fit.edu/~jdwyer/papers.htm
See also: http://bigbang-entanglement.blogspot.com/
For x-ray production related to discharges, see x rays from 80 cm long sparks in air:
http://www.lightning.ece.ufl.edu/PDF/AGU/Rahman_et_al_2008.pdf
Multiple X-ray bursts from long discharges in air, C.V. Nguyen, A.P.J. van Deursen, U. Ebert, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 41, 234012 (2008) [7 pages, 7 figures], paper