The Parameters of S.

Marinovs Curve
(Evidence for My Three-dimensional Time and my new Wave Formula)
Vincenzo Sicari,
Posta privata! Presso, Enel SpA Div. Gem (U.B.T.) C.le Ettore Majorana
C.da Tonnarella, Zona Industriale - 90018 Termini Imerese Palermo (Italy)
E-mail: vincenzo.sicari@enel.com
There are various physics phenomenon which can find a simple explanation in link-
ing gravity and electromagnetism. Einsteins Relativity can simply explain only the
mass because he considered time as a scalar rather than a vector. The intension of this
paper is to propose a new point of view, treating time as a three-dimensional vector,
finding three vector value formula by three-dimensional space-time formula (curva-
ture formula), finding a new symmetry on the plane for a wave equation substitute for
Maxwells symmetrical wave, only E and only B, not E and B linked. This linking
is in error; in fact they are a two sum effect. The electromagnetic wave in space has,
as well known, three energy components: B field E field and wave length (frequency).
This energy is acknowledged, but we must see the wave like an elastic chain of single
wavelets (a string of individual wavelets).

1 Introduction wave moves in our direction (expansion line), and therefore

the velocities are c, = c/ c2 + c2 .
My theory foresees space-time (energetic) as 6 dimension;
three space-like and three time-like, but only if the energy E,
then mass, is to be considered as an effect of curvature.
The space-time-energy is 9 dimensional; 3 spatial, 3 time-
like and 3 energetic. Each point in the Universe is unique,
because there is one space, one energy, one time! These di- Fig. 1:
mensions are generated by a gravitational wave (relativistic
wave), emitted by a Black Hole (Big Bang). This wave is
like the radiation postulated by S. Hawking, hence these are
electro-magnetic waves. The energy (now not obscure), trav-
elling on the expansion line is condensed in matter (space-
time). The time, the space and the energy are hence equiva-
lent (one unique reality), exactly like a magnetic field and the
electric field and the gravitational field.
In effect they are condensed at the three directions of Fig. 2:
space, x,y,z. The basis of charge is a bipole, the mass, gravita-
tional charge (neutrino-photon), magnetic charge
(magnetone-magnetino), electric-charge (electron-positron)
likemyT.o.E.Laprova!Alast(T.o.E.)v.2.4[38].Asthe
time shift, measured and graphed by Stefan Marinov [34] now
have parameters, they are described by my wave formula, ob-
tained by my three-dimensional time formula.

The parameters are = v/c = 1/ 2 = 0.707106781.
R = radius by wave generator, 2 = 2.700948948;
Fig. 3:
scale factor = 60.169999776 (denotes a well known coeffi-
cient like the observed data of Anderson et al.) In order to
explain time varying Sun-Earth distance: 1/S f = 0.166196
101 ). The other factors are implicit (they are derived by my
formula), linked and painted by me to match the curve of Ste-
fan Marinovs data [34]. This evidence is very significant; a
simple law of Nature.
By my 3-D space, 3-D time, 3-D energy theory, the free
wave energy (Ex Dark Energy) is c c c. The spherical

Vincenzo Sicari. The Parameters of S.Marinovs Curve 1


Fig. 4:
Fig. 5:
Submitted on Month Day, Year / Accepted on Month Day, Year
References
1. Abaham, M., Becker, R., Theorie der Elektrizitat, Leipzig, Berlin, B.
G. Teubner, 1930
2. Adair, R.K., et al., Search for Particles with Fractional Charge 4/3e in
Cosmic Rays, Phys. Rev. n. 20 1968), p. 217
3. Afriat A., The Paradox of Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen in Atomic,
Nuclear and Particle Physics, New York and London, Plenum Press,
1998
4. Aharonov, Y., et al., Time Symmetry in the Quantum Process of Mea-
surement, 1964 Physical Review 134B, p. 1417
5. Bartlett M. Introduction into probability processes theory. Foreign Lit-
erature, Moscow, 1958.
6. Bell J.S., On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox, Physics 1 1964),
195
7. Bennett C.L., Evidence for microscopic causality violation, Phys. Rev.
A35 1987), 2409
8. Bennett C.L., Further evidence for causality violation, Phys. Rev. A35
1987), 2420
9. Bennett C.L., Precausal Quantum Mechanics, Physical Review A36
1987), 4139
10. Bennett, C.H., et al., Teleporting an unknown quantum state via dual
classical and EPR channels, Phys. Rev. n. 70 1993), p. 1895
11. Bilaniuk, O.M., Sudarshan, G., Particle beyond the light barrier,
Physics Today n. 22 1969), p. 43
12. Bjorken, J.D., Drell, S.D., Relativistic Quantum Mechanics, McGraw
Hill, 1965
13. Bonacci, E., Absolute Relativity, Carta e Penna, 2007
14. Bonacci, E., Special Relativity Extension, Carta e Penna, 2006
15. Bonacci, E.,Condensed matter properties in 6d, 2008 Europhysics Con-
ference Abstracts
16. Chen, X., Three Dimensional Time Theory: to Unify the Principles of
Basic Quantum Physics and Relativity, ArXiv, 2005
17. Crothers S. J. Gravitation on a spherically symmetric metric manifold.
Progress in Physics, 2007, v.2, 6874.
18. Crothers S. J. The Schwarzschild solution and its implications for grav-
itational waves. Mathematics, Physics and Philosophy in the Interpre-
tations of Relativity Theory, Proceedings of the Conference, Budapest,
4-6 September, 2009.
2 Vincenzo Sicari. The Parameters of S.Marinovs Curve
19. Crothers S. J. On the geometry of the general solution for the vacuum
field of the point-mass. Progress in Physics, 2005, v. 2, 314.
20. Crothers S. J. Certain conceptual anomalies in Einsteins theory of rel-
ativity. Progress in Physics, 2008, v. 1, 5257.
21. Crothers S. J. On isotropic coordinates and Einsteins gravitational
field. Progress in Physics, 2006, v. 3, 712.
22. Crothers S. J. On the ramifications of the Schwarzschild space-time
metric. Progress in Physics, 2005, v. 1, 7480.
23. Crothers S. J. The Kruskal-Szekeres Extension: Counter-Examples.
Progress in Physics, 2010, v. 1, 37.
24. DAgostino, S., Lelettromagnetismo classico, Sansoni, 1975
25. Einstein, A., Can Quantum-mechanical Description of Physical Reality
be Considered Complete?, Princeton, 1983
26. Einstein, A., Il Significato della Relativit, Boringhieri, 1959
27. Einstein, A., Relativity, Routledge Classics, 2001
28. Einstein, A., The Meaning of Relativity, Methuen, 1951
29. Feynman, R.P., The Theory of Positrons, Physical Review n. 76 1949),
p. 749
30. Feynman, R.P., Wheeler, J.A., Interaction with the Absorber as the
Mechanism of Radiation, Rev. Mod. Phys. n. 17 1945), p. 157
31. Lehnert B. A Revised Electromagnetic Theory With Fundamental Ap-
plications Svenska fysikarkivet, 2008
32. Lunsford D.R., Gravitation and Electrodynamics over SO3;3), Cern
Archive: ext-2003-090
33. Majorana, E., Teoria simmetrica dellelettrone e del positrone, Nuovo
Cimento n. 14 1937), p. 171
34. Marinov S. New Measurement of the Earths Absolute Velocity with
the Help of the Coupled Shutters Experiment. Progress in Physics,
2007, v.1, 3137.
35. Maxwell, J.C., Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Dover, 1954
36. Oros di Bartini R. Some relations between physical constants. Doklady
Acad. Nauk USSR, 1965, v. 163, No. 4, 861864.
37. Pauli W. Theory of Relativity. Pergamon Press, 1958.
38. Sicari,V.,Laprova!AlastT.o.E.)rev.2.4,2010
39. Sparling, J.A., Spacetime is spinorial; new dimensions are time-like,
ArXiv, 2006
40. Stanyukovich K. P. Gravitational field and elementary particles Nauka,
Moscow, 1965.
41. Smarandache F., Christianto V. Mundane Explanation of Pioneer
Anomaly from Q-Relativity. Progress in Physics, 2010, v. 1, 4245
 Explanation of the parameters of the S. Marinovs curve

The following Marinovs curve in the x-axis is divided into 24 h, the zero line intersects the curve at
09:00 and 21:00 hours therefore moving the x-axis of 3 hours we have a perfect symmetry, ie / 2 is
at 12:00 hours!
If we compare the Marinovs curve with the Y curve of my three-dimensional time, we see that this
happens when the Y is equal to A. Einstein classic relativistic Y (90 degree), ie Y = 1 / (1-B ^ 2) ^
0.5. So if the Marinovcurve and mine are the same curve, then in my curve I must find the same
asymmetry, ie, 120/50 = 2.4.

Rather than solve the equation in an Excel spreadsheet, experimentally by several attempts at the
end you get the value of B = 0.70414, Y Max = 3.3799 Max, YR = 1.408329376, Y Min = 0.58680
The ratio is 2.399990423 nearly equal to 2.4.
Now to get the values of the curve Marinov we get the two equal values Fs = Scaling factor
(YM-YR) / (YM-YR) = 120 / 1.97 = 60.8628 and (YR-Ym) / (YR-Ym) = 50 / 0.8215 = 60.86256.
then i placed in the formula 60.862 and I inverted the curve and I moved three hours, so I got a
curve identical, in fact, by manually entering the red curve fit nicely (see picture).

To my surprise the beta looked too 1 / (2) ^ 0.5, and (YM-YR) / (YR-Ym) looked too 1 + (2) ^ 0.5.
Then I put these values into the formula.
Since I am a perfectionist I began to change in the Marinovs curve the beta for the two values of Fs
equals, but without success.
At end I realized that I was a error in reasoning:
The value is in fact not (YR-F (x)) * Fs-YR,
but (YR-F (x)) * Fs

Autore Vincenzo Sicari Explanation of the parameters of the S. Marinovs curve.pdf

Noting by curve drawn by Marinov the value (YR-Ym) and (YM-YR) their ratio was to be 1 +2 ^
0.5, varying Fs this time I found two perfectly identical values (for Marinov YR = 0), then (Ymax-
YR) = 120.339999552 (YR-Ymin) = 49.846459929,
their ratio is 1 + (2) ^ 0.5,
the scale factor is (YM-YR) / (YM-YR) = (YR-Ym) / (YR-Ym) = 60.1699.

If we perform the operation 1 / 60, 1699 we obtain

0.016619605483805025436306192963591

I noticed that resembles the values found in the file that I 0.166 kindly sent to me by
V. Christianto: "A note on Astrometric date and time varying Sun-Earth distance in light of the Carmeli metric *"
0.0166 cm/year as the expansion rate of Earth

However, if we multiply by 10 ^ 8 we get

1.6619605483805025436306192963591 x 10^6 M/H
which is the hourly speed of rotation of the earth!

So since in my formula of three-dimensional time YR-Y represents the time and

now they are representing the space with its value: 2
The Y of Marinovs curve represents the time its value is 120.339999552
2 / 120, 339,999,552 = 0,016619605483805025436306192963591

it is clear that this is the hourly speed of the earth, and that the non-proportionality
on the power of 10 depend by measurements taken from Marinov

Autore Vincenzo Sicari Explanation of the parameters of the S. Marinovs curve.pdf

 And it is proof that my time curve as well as being the curve of the mass is also
the curve of space!
So (look also my paper a last T.o.E. v2.4),
now we can write: m/m0 = t/t0 = s/s0

at the Lorentz trasformation there are proportionaly by the time and the mass, in fact:
m/m0=t/t0

To draw the curve with my formula we need is the radius!

The value of R, in my three-dimensional time formula is the radius of the rotating body:
= R / , then R = * / (2 *) = (1 / (2) ^ 0.5) * 24 / (2 *) =
2,7009489484713182086655975730202 Hours.

What other fascinating mysteries hidden the nature in this curve?

Web References

Sicari V., http://www.vixra.org/abs/1011.0025 The Parameters of S. Marinov's Curve (Evidence for my Three-Dimensional
Time and my New Wave Formula)

Sicari V., http://www.vixra.org/abs/1011.0005 La Prova! a Last (T.o.e.)

Autore Vincenzo Sicari Explanation of the parameters of the S. Marinovs curve.pdf