Click of open: Is It Possible To Predict Scientific and Economic Development, 1999. Presented at a small conference in Russia in 1999 and published.
I think that God gives people knowledge and that he may give people an understanding of history to allow people to predict the future to some extent, though I realize that I don’t really know what the future holds. If very basic patterns can be found in history, and it can be expected that the patterns may hold in the future, even after people come to understand the patterns and the predictions based on them, they may still fulfill the prediction. I don’t know how foreknowledge of the predicted events will affect the future. I don’t even know if people will accept these ideas. And of course, I don’t know whether intervening disasters may happen. In this paper, I will describe primarily how the 80 year periodicity of scientific revolutions causes the Kondratiev periodicity of economic depressions about 40 year intervals, and then give a step by step chronological example, and then give evidence of the validity of the theory.
My theory has been in development for 10 years. 10 years ago I formulated the basic theory presented here, and the theory has proved correct for the entire decade of the 1990s in three areas: scientific development, economic development (the book predicted an economic boom period for the most technologically advanced economies), and technological development. In regards to technological development, the theory predicted a major boom in Quantum Mechanics based industries. And in regards to scientific development, the book predicted a scientific revolution which has turned out to be based on I think cold fusion phenomena and plasmoid phenomena. One can read about cold fusion on the Institute for New Energy web site, or on the new Nov. 1998 Wired Magazine article just put up online.
My theory is based on three principles which seem to have been unchanged for at least 500 years. These principles are that 1) people who already apprehend a physics theory can not change their ideas to be productive in a new replacement theory 2) people who are theoretical developers are not good technicians or experimenters, and 3) there is some impetus, maybe just desire to achieve and produce, that keeps people to develop physics and technology as rapidly as they are able to do so. Based on these ideas about the history of science, I try to show that this produces a generational pattern of scientific development of scientific revolutions at 80 year intervals. In my book, I try to show that the 80 year periodicity of science is very noticable.
The picture above is of two plasmoid ring marks photographed in 1996 while working in the Fusion Study Lab or George Miley. The thin metal layer on the plastic substrate was impinged by two microplasmoids of different sizes. On the various parts of this transmutation electrolysis cell, there were hundreds of marks like these, and scores of pictures were recorded. The markings were like those shown by Matsumoto and Shoulders, and these are evidence that a scientific revolution was underway in the early 1990s because this was the second or third major experiment in the LENR field to evidence plasmoids are directly related to transmutation. It was predicted that more and more experiments will report this plasmoid emission, and as of now in 2023, perhaps 20 groups of researchers have reported this effect in various kinds of transmutation and energy producing experiments since 1989. This is a rough estimate.