Institute for Basic 

Main Page | Table of Contents | Journals | Subscriptions | Submissions | Monographs | IBR Grants | IBR Conferences | Hadronic Mechanics | Latest Discoveries | About Us | CV of IBR Members | E-Mail Us
March 31, 2014

By the
Agence de la Recherche Scientifique
Division de Guadaloupe

Translations in French and Arabic are in preparation.
Conducted by Skype and emails.

Curriculum of Prof. R. M. Santilli

Technical inquiries should be sent to
Prof. R. M. Santilli at the Email: basicresearch(at)i-b-r(dot)org

Q. Prof. Santilli, please tell us the origin of your dream.
During my Ph. D. studies at the University of Torino, Italy, in the mid 1960s, I decided to seek mathematical, theoretical and experimental means to ascertain whether a far away galaxy is made up of matter or of antimatter. Let me tell you upfront that, some fifty years later and countless sleepless nights, I am still far from having fully achieved my dream due to the complexities of the problems to be solved.

Q. Please identify the biggest obstacle.
Once the objective was set, I immediately discovered that Newton's mechanics, Galilei's relativity and Einstein's special and general relativities, since they were conceived way before the discovery of antimatter, they were completely unable to even formulate the detection of antimatter because their sole conjugation was the sign of the charge, while I had to study galaxies at the "classical" level and assume that they are "neutral". In the absence of a classical conjugation from neutral matter to neutral antimatter I was simply stuck.

Q. Tell us about failed attempts.
Newton, Galilei and Einstein are my Teachers and Mentors. The idea that I had to surpass them was for me repulsive. Therefore, I spent decades in trying to reconcile my needs for a quantitative classical representation of neutral (as well as charged) antimatter bodies with Newton's mechanics, Galilei's relativity and Einstein's special and general relativity with complete failure and without publishing any paper in the field while doing career oriented Phys Rev papers.

To give you an idea of the technical problems, the assumption of representing the trajectory of a neutral antimatter comet or asteroid in our solar system via Newton's equations had the following insurmountable difficulties among others: (1) Evident lack of any distinction between matter and antimatter; (2)Total failure to represent matter-antimatter annihilation; (3) Insurmountable inconsistencies for a correct quantization because under operator maps I would get a "particle" rather than the charge conjugate antiparticle with the wrong sign of the charge; (4) Collapse of any representation of experiments on antimatter at the operator level; (5) Violation (for certain technical reasons) of Von Neumann's imprimitivity theorem, with consequential collapse of the operator theory. In short, the failures and inconsistencies were total at the classical as well as particle level.

Fig. 1 The prediction of of antimatter light being repelled by a matter gravitational field

Q. Please outline the birth of isodual mathematics.
I am convinced that the protracted lack of solution of "physical" problems is generally due to insufficient "mathematics". In the early 1980s, when I was at Harvard's Department of Mathematics under DOE support jointly with my friend there the geometer Shlomo Sternberg, and literally "out of desperation", I decided to build a new mathematics specifically conceived for the classical representation of neutral or charged antimatter, thus including bodies as well as light.

Following the waste of one year in Cantabridgean libraries to locate the needed mathematics, I had no other option then to building it myself. To represent the matter-antimatter conjugation at the classical and quantum levels, the needed new math had to be anti-isomorphic to the conventional mathematics used for matter. This is the case for charge conjugation, but the latter solely applied in a Hilbert space, while the needed mathematics had to be applicable at all levels, from Newtonian mechanics to second quantization.

After a number of additional failures, I finally had the bold idea of building a new mathematics based on a "negative basic unit" obtained via an anti-hermitean conjugation now called "isoduality" and denoted with the upper index "d"

(1)         Id = -1 = - 1

        In fact, this basic assumption would guarantee that the mathematics based on the isodual unit -1 is indeed anti-isomorphic to the conventional mathematics.

Fig. 2 The prediction of negative index of refraction of antimatter-light traveling within a transparent matter-medium.

Isodual mathematics is the reconstruction of the entirety of 20th century mathematics used for matter in such a way to admit -1 as the left and right unit, resulting in isodual numbers, isodual spaces, isodual differential calculus, isodual functional analysis, isodual algebras, isodual Euclidean, Minkowskian and Riemannian geometries, etc.

Q. Please outline the birth of the isodual physics.
Being an applied mathematician by instinct and education, the construction of the new math turned out to be quite easy, but I abstained from publishing papers in the field because I consider the new math and the related physics, to be "crazy" due to excessive departures from the evidence of our sensory perception.

Fig. 3 Main characteristics of the primary lens in the Galileo telescope (top view) and Santilli telescope (bottom view). In the Galileo case the primary lens has to be convex because matter-light experiences a positive (conventional) index of refraction when passing through a transparent matter-medium. In Santilli telescope the primary lens has to be concave because antimatter-light has a negative index of refraction when passing through a transparent matter-medium (Fig. 2).

Under the isodual map., the entirety of physical quantities as well as their units are conjugated. As an illustration, if you have $1M in an "antimatter checking account" you are in red for $1M because isodual mathematics demands the conjugation of everything for consistency, including the conjugation of quantities "and" their units. Hence, $1M is referred to the negative unit-$1 resulting in $1M in red.

It is known that moving backward in time or having negative energy violate various physical laws. Under isoduality, antiparticles evolve backward in time and have negative energies (these are old condition to represent annihilation), but the units of time (the second) and energy (the erg) also change sign. Therefore, particles moving backward in time with negative energies referred to corresponding negative units of time and energy are as physical as our particles moving forward in time with positive energies referred to corresponding positive units of time and energies.

Q. Did you study the 1908 Tunguska explosion?
Quite honestly, I was about to abandon the field because I was totally alone while being "justly" considered a "whacko" by my colleagues. However, I am convinced that, as scientists, we have to serve mankind, particularly when aware of potential problems to society. The 1908 Tunguska explosion in Siberia had a crucial role in my continuing the studies of antimatter.

In fact, I did quantitative studies (with equations rather than ideas) of the Tunguska explosion and concluded that. It could only be due to an antimatter asteroid annihilating in the upper layers of our atmosphere. An ice comet can indeed account for the flattening of the trees over a vast area without burning them and without any solid residue in the ground. The antimatter origin becomes mandatory from the fact that, days following the explosion, people could read the newspaper in the middle of the night on the opposite side of Earth (Sidney, Australia) without any artificial light. You cannot do that with ice. This is clear evidence of extreme excitation of our atmosphere due to huge radiations solely of electromagnetic character.

I saw a real danger for America and other countries since a similar catastrophe can happen again with total paralysis of civilian, industrial and military communications, let alone untold devastations on the ground. America has been very generous to me by allowing the fulfillment of my research dream. I "had" to continue the study of antimatter even though considered a "whacko" (to use a gentle word) by my colleagues.

Q. Did you inspect the compatibility with Dirac's equation?
Another source of strength in continuing the research, was the conventional Dirac equation because Dirac's gamma-4 matrix is precisely composed of a 2x2-dimensional positive unit and a 2x2-dimensional "negative" unit, while the space components contain Pauli's matrices in Kronecker product with their isodual

(2)        γ4 = Diag. (I2x2, Id2x2, γk = σk x σdk

In short, the isodual theory of antimatter is confirmed 100% by the conventional Dirac equation. In his genius, Dirac set the foundations off the isodual theory. but missed the isodual mathematics to reach the same conclusions.

I should say that I never accepted the 20th century interpretation of Dirac's equation as "representing a particle with spin 1/2" because there exists "no" irreducible or reducible representation of the SU(2)-spin symmetry with the form of the gamma matrices. Their only technically correct structure is that of a 2-dimensional representation ofSU(2)_ times that of SU(2)^d.

Q. What are the implications for antigravity?
Einstein general relativity can only represent the gravitational field of matter. The matter-antimatter conjugation applied to gravity mandates antigravity between matter and antimatter at "all" levels, beginning from Newton. The rigorous formulation is that of first representing the gravitational field of antimatter via the isodual Riemannian geometry, and then looking at the matter-antimatter gravitational interactions. The curvature tensor is negative, ergo antigravity is unavoidable. This point is so strong that in the event there is no antigravity in the matter-antimatter interactions, there "cannot" be annihilation, and you have other huge inconsistencies.

Fig. 4 Schematic view of Galileo telescope with convex lenses (top view) and Santilli telescope with concave lenses (bottom view).

Q. Tell us about the 1996 First Workshop on Antimatter Astrophysics.
In 1996, my wife Carla and I organized the First International Workshop on Antimatter astrophysics at the little town of Sepino, central Italy (see the Proceedings [1]) with participation of colleagues from FERMILAB, CERN and other labs who showed to have an open and curious mind. Hence, I felt encouraged to present the new isodual mathematics and indicate some of its implications for antimatter.

I was honored by the colleagues with the invited paper [2] in which I presented the prediction that antimatter-light is physically different than matter-light in an experimentally verifiable way. Since for light there is no charge to conjugate, the matter-antimatter conjugation applied to light requires the conjugation of "all" other physical quantities in the transition from matter-light to antimatter-light (technically called isodual light).

In particular, the isodual photon must have a negative energy referred to a negative unit. Consequently, antimatter light is predicted to experience repulsion (anti-bending) in a matter gravitational field. Additional differences are also suitable for experimental measurements [2].

In this way, after initiating my research in the 1960s, it was only in 1996 that I started to see the future possibility of ascertaining whether a far away galaxy is made up of matter or of antimatter. In fact, the possible experimental confirmation of light from a distant galaxy being repelled by matter gravitation would establish the antimatter character of the light source.

At this Sepino workshop I also presented a draft of the monograph [3] that I only released later on in 2006 for publication by Springer.

Q. Tell us about the 2011 Second Workshop on Antimatter Astrophysics.
In 2011, my wife Carla and I organized the Second International Workshop on Antimatter Astrophysics at the Republic of San Marino in the Northern Italian Peninsula, which was a great success. In fact, during the workshop, I received the greatest honor granted by that Republic, the Gran Cross of the St. Agata Order.

This workshop was instrumental for the initiation of the all important "antimatter optics" (technically called "isodual optics"). In particular, I understood that antimatter light is predicted to experience a "negative index of refraction" when measured in our laboratory (and not in an antimatter lab in which the index of refraction is normal) when passing through a transparent matter medium such as matter-glass.

Fig. 5 The parallel mount of the Galileo and Santilli telescopes with related finder scopes used in Santilli historical tests.

Q. Tell us the fulfillment of your old dream.
The above prediction gave birth to what is friendly called "Santilli crazy telescope" (technically called isodual telescope) because based on "concave lenses" as the only capable of focusing light with a negative index of refraction. During the two subsequent years I suffered the rejection by telescope manufacturers to build such a telescope, again, because dubbed "crazy" despite the offer of paying whatever asked. Finally, I located a manufacturer in China who finally did build the needed "crazy telescope".

Finally, I could put together in parallel the conventional Galileo telescope and the new one with concave lenses and with this set up I initiated the view of the Vega region of the night sky at 11 pm of November 7, 2013, at the Anclote Gulf Park, Holiday, Florida, GPS Coordinates: Latitude = 28.193, Longitude = -82.786. I set the camera at the exposure of 15 seconds for the specific intent of having streaks of light from far away matter stars caused by Earth rotation, since streaks can be better identified with the limited capabilities of the available telescopes compared to individual dots of light in the pictures. Additionally, streaks from matter stars have a clear orientation as well as length that are important for the identification of possible streaks from antimatter light.

I will remember for the rest of my life the thrill of the moment when, in the middle of the night at the Anclote Gulf Park in Holiday, Florida, I inspected the enlargement of the first picture of the Vega sky from the new telescope and did see fully focused streaks and other images that were believed to be impossible from a telescope with concave lenses. I then inspected the enlargement of the corresponding picture from the Galileo telescope in the same region of the sky and confirmed that t5he streaks presents in the new telescope were absent in the Galileo telescope, thus confirming the novelty.

The results of the pictures of the Vega region of the night sky are presented in Ref. [4] and their "preliminary confirmations" are presented in Ref. [5]. The experimental novelty is that a telescope with concave lenses can indeed focus various images (streaks, circles, and others). That appears to be certain. My personal view is that the detected light is due to antimatter, because the images are primarily of "darkness" rather than light, thus fully compatible with the need for antimatter light to have all quantities conjugated, thus including the conjugation of positive energy of matter light into negative energy of antimatter light. In turn, negative energy light can only be repelled by a matter field.

The unexpected "price to pay" in detecting antimatter galaxy is that "we cannot see them with our eyes in a Galileo or other conventional telescope". In fact, our iris is convex, thus dispersing antimatter light all over our retina. Similarly, Galileo and other conventional telescope have convex lenses, thus being unable to focus antimatter light.

Fig. 6 Enlarged view of one of the streaks of matter-light representing a far away matter-galaxy identified in the main picture of the Epsilon Alpha and Beta region of the night sky near Vega obtained on November 7, 2013, via the Galileo telescope.

Fig. 7 The first streak identified in the picture of the Epsilon Alpha and Beta region of the night sky taken on November 7, 2013, with Santilli telescope. This picture is a historical record because it constitutes the first evidence on scientific record that a telescope with concave lenses can focus images that, as such, can only be due to antimatter-light. Note that the streak is parallel to that of antimatter light of Fig. 6, it does not exist in the pictures of the Galileo telescope of the same region of the sky, and the depicted image is a streak of darkness, thus confirming Dirac's vision that antimatter possesses negative energy. (see Ref. [4] for technical details and for several additional pictures).

Q. What are the main implications for your studies in cosmology?
Stated in a nutshell, in the event confirmed, the isodual physics, including the isodual telescope, would imply the total revision in due time of our current knowledge on antimatter, not in a revolutionary way, but rather along an evolutionary way.

For instance, pioneering studies on antimatter comets and their huge effects when hitting the Sun remain fully valid. The only change is for their detection since we cannot see them in our conventional telescope built to detect matter, and need new technologies.

Q. What are the implications of your discovery in cosmology?
There is no doubt that a final experimental confirmation of the isodual theory of antimatter will imply a revision of our current conception of the universe.

A current cosmological belief is that antimatter galaxies do not exist because they are not predicted by Einstein's theories. But, as indicate earlier, these theories were formulated long before the discovery of antimatter. I have to voice my objection against this type of exploitation in Einstein's name without any scientific content.

As suggested by the images I have detected with a telescope with concave lenses, the universe may contain a large number of antimatter-galaxies that are not visible with the human eye or with Galileo and similar telescopes, since they have been designed for the detection of matter-galaxies. In any case, only antimatter-galaxies can explain the presence in our solar system of antimatter cosmic rays, antimatter asteroids, and antimatter comets. Note that the words "antimatter astrophysics" did not exist before our studies and, nowadays, they constitute a rapidly growing new science.

Q. Do you accept current view on the laboratory production of antiparticles?
Perhaps, the biggest departure from current beliefs occurs for what are today called "antiprotons" since they emerge as "not necessarily" being antiprotons (\bar p^-), but being instead what I have called "pseudo-proton" (symbol p^*-).

You may inspect the Appendix of Ref. [4] for technical details. In a nutshell, recall that antiprotons are claimed to be produced via the high energy impact of proton on a matter-target. In this collision, we first have the impact of protons with the electron shells of peripheral atoms of the matter0-target. Since the proton has all the necessary energy, the existing laws of physics predict the synthesis of the neutron according to the celebrated reaction

(3)         p+ + e- → n + ?,

The neutron so created carries must of the original energy of the proton and, as such, the neutron may absorb an additional electron via a reaction very similar to the preceding one producing what I have called the pseudo-proton

(4)         n + e- → p*,-

where one should note that there is no need for the emission of the hypothetical neutrino.

Calculations [4] have shown that the (negative) Coulomb interaction with the proton and the two electrons (in singlet coupling with null total angular momentum) acquire such a large value at one Fermi mutual distance that the mass of the neutron is essentially reduced to that of the proton in reaction (4). Hence, the pseudo-proton has essentially the same mass of the proton and the same mean life of the neutron (about 15 minutes).

I am not saying that the antiprotons as currently produced definitely are not antiparticles. What I am saying is that additional independent experimental confirmations are needed prior to the definite claim we are dealing with antiparticles. Of course, the best independent verification is their use for annihilation processes.

It is at this point that my doubt on the true antiparticle nature of the claimed antiprotons emerge in their full light because "matter and antimatter must annihilate solely into light", while available high energy collisions of protons and the claimed antiprotons produces a large number of massive particles.

As an example, consider the so-called Bose-Einstein correlation where the collision of high energy collision of protons and the claimed antiprotons produces a large number of massive particles

(5)         p+ + p*- → massive particles.

This is strong evidence that the claimed antiprotons are not real antiparticles, but a mere new form of the proton because the annihilation of protons with true antiprotons must solely produce light

(6)         p+ + \bar p- → γ + γd

where I have added the production of the isodual light because suggested by the new invariance of the Dirac equations under isoduality.

Think again of the Tunguska explosion. In the event that explosion had produced particles as occurring in the claimed proton-antiproton collisions, the entire ground would have been incinerated since the explosion was the equivalent of 1000 Hiroshima atomic bombs. Instead, trees were merely flattened to the grounds without any evidence of particle emission.

The pseudo-proton produced according to reaction (4) has sufficient mean life to attract positrons thus producing a kind of atom, which is not a true anti-Hydrogen atom because mostly made up of a matter-particle, the pseudo-proton, while the antiparticle content (the positron) is about 2,000 times lighter.

Evidently, the proof that the claimed "antiprotons" and related "anti-Hydrogen atom" are not true antimatter would spell catastrophe for colleagues at CERN, FERMILAB, and other labs, but it could be very beneficial for mankind because reaction (5) appears to have serious possibilities for new clean nuclear energies without harmful radiations that we are currently studying at Thunder Energies Corporation (see the web site

Fig. 8 The first of numerous circular traces identified in a picture of Vega regions of the night sky on Nov ember 7, 2013, with Santilli telescope. Note that the picture is taken under a 15 seconds exposure, thus indicating that its origin was an instantaneous event, thus suggesting that these circular traces are due to the annihilation of antimatter cosmic ray in the upper portion of our atmosphere.

Fig. 9 Picture of an image from Santilli telescope expected to be due to the annihilation of a small antimatter asteroid in the upper region of the sky because taken under 15 seconds exposure and not being o circular character as for the case of antimatter cosmic rays. Note that all images taken from Santilli telescopes cannot be seen by the human eye because our iris is convex, thus dispersing the image all over the retina.

Q. What should be done next?
I believe that our Military should be informed of their potential paralysis in the event we are hit by an antimatter asteroid the size of a football. Military agencies (such as DARPA) should provide funds to continue the research which I have personally supported until now but that's it. I have done my duty. It is high time for society to provide funds for the continuation of the studies.

Secondly, it is crucial to test the gravity of massive antiparticles, not with the claimed antiproton, but with the only massive antiparticle we are sure to be antimatter, the positron. For this I proposed in 1994 the measure of the comparative gravity of very low energy electrons and positrons in flight in a horizontal super-cooled and super-vacuum tube (see the engineering proposal ) which has been declared as being resolutory by experimentalists in antimatter [3].

I would like to stress emphatically that the conduction of the test of the gravity of antimatter via the use of the claimed antiprotons and the claimed anti-Hydrogen atom "before" their final confirmation that they are indeed true antimatter, could create a scientific obscurantism in antimatter that will last for centuries, besides costing billions of dollars to the taxpayer, in the event the claimed antiproton is a pseudo-proton, gravitational attraction is certain and the same would be the case for the claimed anti-Hydrogen atom.

Thirdly, it is essential to measure the gravity of antimatter-light. This can be done by testing with neutron interferometry the gravity of the two photons produced by electron-positron annihilation

(7)         e- + e- => γ + γd

The isodual theory predicts that one is a matter-photon, thus being attracted, and the other is the isodual photon, thus being repelled by Earth's gravitational field.

Until we reach incontrovertible experimental measurements of the gravity of true massive antiparticles and of antimatter-light, any view on antimatter, whether expressed by me or CERN or FERMILAB, will remain what it is now, a personal opinion. Thanks for the stimulating questions.

Ruggero Maria Santilli

[1] M. Holzscheiter, Editor, Proceedings of the International Workshop on Antimatter Gravity, Sepino, Italy, May 1996, published by Hyperfine Interactions Vol. 109, 1997

[2] R. M. Santilli, "Does antimatter emit a new light?" Invited paper for the proceedings of the International Conference on Antimatter, held in Sepino, Italy, on May 1996, published in Hyperfine Interactions 1997, Vol. 109, pages 63-81

[3] R. M. Santilli, Isodual Theory of Antimatter with Application to Antigravity, Grand Unification and the Spacetime Machine, Springer 2006

[4] Ruggero Maria Santilli, Apparent detection of antimatter galaxies via a refractive telescope with concave lenses," Clifford Analysis, Clifford Algebras and their Applications Vol. 3, pages 1-26, 2014 (Cambridge, UK)

[5\ P. Bhujbal, J. V. Kadeisvili, A. Nas, S Randall, and T. R. Shelke,. "Preliminary confirmation of antimatter detection via Santilli telescope with concave lenses," Clifford Analysis, Clifford Algebras and their Applications Vol. 3, pages 27-39, 2014 (Cambridge, UK)


Main Page | Table of Contents | Journals | Subscriptions | Submissions | Monographs | IBR Grants | IBR Conferences | Hadronic Mechanics | Latest Discoveries | About Us | CV of IBR Members | E-Mail Us

Last Revised: December 14th, 2001

Copyright 1997-2003 Institute for Basic Research, P. O. Box 1577, Palm Harbor, FL 34682, U.S.A.
Tel: 1-727-934 9593 Fax: 1-727-934 9275 E-Mail:
All Rights Reserved.