The Eternal Source of Energy of the Universe, Origin and Intensity of Cosmic Rays

October 13, 1932, New York

A little over one century ago many astronomers, including Laplace still thought that:

• the system of heavenly bodies was unalterable
• they would perform their motions in the same manner forever.

But improvements since then, has revealed that there is a continuous change going on in the celestial regions, subjecting all bodies to ever varying influence.

Where this change is leading to?

In a communication to the Royal Society of Edinburgh dated April 19, 1852 and the Philosophical Magazine, Lord Kelvin emphasized the general tendency in nature towards dissipation of mechanical energy.

• This is daily seen in thermo-dynamic and dynamo-thermic processes and one of ominous significance.

It meant that:

• the driving force of the universe was steadily decreasing
• ultimately all of its motive energy will be exhausted

In the macro-cosmos, this process might require billion of years.

• But in the micro-cosmos it must have been quickly completed.

This means that any material substance cooled down to the absolute zero of temperature should be devoid of an internal movement and energy, so to speak, dead.

Kelvin is a great philosopher and my friend.

He had a fascinating effect on my mind. In meditating over it, I got an idea that if there is energy within the substance, it can only come from outside: “There is no energy in matter except that absorbed from the medium.”

Lord Kelvin gave us a picture of a dying universe, of a clockwork wound up and running down, inevitably doomed to come to a full stop in the far, far off future.

Was there not some force winding up the clock as it runs down?

If all energy is supplied to matter from outside then this all important function must be performed by the medium. How?

When radioactive rays were discovered, their investigators believed them to be due to liberation of atomic energy in the form of waves.

• But this is impossible, in the light of the preceding.

I concluded that they were produced by some external disturbance and composed of electrified particles.

Suppose that bullets are fired against a wall.

Where a missile strikes, the material is crushed and spatters in all directions radial from the place of impact.

This shows that the energy of the flying pieces can only be derived from that of the bullets.

But in radio-activity, no such proof could be advanced. It became of first importance to demonstrate experimentally the existence of this miraculous disturbance in the medium.

I derived from a great mass of air, ionized by the disturbance, a current, storing its energy in a condenser and discharging it.

This plan did away with the limitations and incertitude of the electroscope first employed and was described by me in articles and patents from 1900 to 1905.

It was logical to expect, judging from the behavior of known radiations, that the chief source of the new rays would be the sun. But this was contradicted by observations and theoretical considerations.

The Ether

Light and heat rays are absorbed in their passage through a medium in a certain proportion to its density.

The ether is the most tenuous of all substances, is no exception to this rule.

Its density has been first estimated by Lord Kelvin and conformably to his finding a column of 1 square centimeter cross section and of a length such that light, traveling at 300,000 kilometers per second, would require 1 year to traverse it, should weigh 4.8 grams.

This is just about the weight of a prism of ordinary glass of the same cross section and 2 centimeters length which, therefore, may be assumed as the equivalent of the ether column in absorption.

A column of the ether 1,000 times longer would thus absorb as much light as 20 meters of glass.

However, there are suns at distances of many thousands of light years. It is evident that virtually no light from them can reach the earth.

But if these suns emit rays immensely more penetrative than those of light they will be slightly dimmed and so the aggregate amount of radiations pouring upon the earth from all sides will be overwhelmingly greater than that supplied to it by our luminary.

If light and heat rays would be as penetrative as the cosmic, so fierce would be the perpetual glare and so scorching the heat that life on this and other planets could not exist.

Rays in every respect similar to the cosmic are produced by my vacuum tubes when operated at pressures of 10,000,000 volts or more. But even if it were not confirmed by experiment, my 1897 theory is the simplest and most probable explanation of the phenomena.

The universe, with its infinite and impenetrable boundary, is a perfect vacuum tube of dimensions and power.

Its fiery suns are electrodes at extrene temperatures.

The suns and stars are under immense electrical pressures transcending any that man can ever produce. This is equally true of the vacuum in celestial space.

Cosmic dust and meteoric matter present an infinitude of targets act as reflectors and transformers of energy.

If under ideal working conditions, and with apparatus on a scale beyond the grasp of the human mind, rays of surpassing intensity and penetrative power would not be generated, then nature has made a unique exception to its laws.

The cosmic rays are electrons or that they are the result of creation of new matter in the interstellar deserts.

They are natural outcroppings of this age of deep but unrational thinking, of impossible theories, the latest of which might, perhaps, deal with the curvature of time.

What would our world be if time were curved?

People doubt how the intensity of the cosmic rays varies with altitude.

To them, I offer the following simple formula derived from my early experimental data:

I = (W+P) / (W+p)

W is the kilogram weight of a column of lead of 1 square centimeter wide and 180 centimeters long.

P is the normal pressure of the atmosphere at sea level in kilograms per square centimeter.

p is the atmospheric pressure at the altitude under consideration.

I is the intensity of the radiation in terms of that at sea level taken as unit.

Substituting the actual values for W and P, respectively 1.9809 and 1.0133 kilograms, the formula reduces to:

I = 2.99421 / (1.9809 + p)

Obviously, at sea level p = P. Hence the intensity is equal to 1, this being the unit of measurement.

On the other hand, at the extreme limit of the atmosphere p = 0 and the intensity I = 1.5115.

The maximum increase with height is, consequently, a little over 51%.

This formula, based on my finding that the absorption is proportionate to the density of the medium whatever it be, is fairly accurate.

Other investigators might find different values for W but they will undoubtedly observe the same character of dependence, namely, that the intensity increases proportionately to the height for a few kilometers and then at a gradually lessening rate.

• Tesliana, spec. edition, Belgrade, YU, 1995., p. 56 - 59.