The electron at rest is the stable particle with the smallest mass existing in nature, while proton has a mass 1836 times greater than the first one.

Considering the limits of the velocities of masses, derived from the existence of a terminal length L, we deduce that proton has a terminal velocity necessarily slower than electron's.

Indeed, the proton's rest wavelength is less far from L; its velocity increases, its wavelength emitted in the direction of motion will first reach the terminal length L.

This means that its terminal velocity is certainly slower than the electron terminal velocity.

As we consider greater and greater masses emitting waves with smaller and smaller wavelength, we will have to verify the reason why their terminal velocity is slower and slower, and less close to the velocity of light.

If we go on to reason, we will deduce that a "maximass", being so great as to have a rest wavelength equal to the terminal length L, will never have any velocity, and it will be obliged to be at rest forever.

At rest compared to what, or to whom?

It is known from relativity that an absolute frame of reference does not exist. It is therefore obvious that the rest of the maximass can exist only in comparison with other observers.

However, since the Doppler effect exists both when a wave source moves toward the observer and when the observer moves toward the wave source, no material real observer endowed with mass will ever have a velocity approaching the "maximass".

Fig. A1

This formula expresses the variation in the wave gravitational force, depending on the entities of masses. Expressing the prevalence either of attraction or repulsion with regard to the cosine function of the angle of view, both from the distance separating the masses a and b, and from the distance where the observer is. 

We could dare to say that the observable universe is perhaps the maximass. But if we verify numerically the real value foretold by the W.F.T.,we shall see that the terminal wavelength is strangely close to the wavelength of the mass of a standard Galaxy, that is about 1 ^. 10⁴¹ kg.

  Fig. A2

Let us describe the wave mass depending on the maximum wave number, that is inverse of the minimum wavelength, multiplied by the ratio h/c, and consider such a maximum mass (maximass) responsible for its absolute angular distribution, or rather depending on its concentration and on its relative velocity with respect to the observer.

When we take masses smaller than the maximass into account, we think that it can attract small masses, but only with an extremely weak force. However, such a mass would attract with a greater force small masses rather than great ones.

At least, such an effect of diversified gravitational force should exist in any case, for any mass, and also for the earth's mass on which there would be therefore a difference in the gravitational attraction of masses of different value: the greater the mass is, the greater the repulsive effect opposed to the gravitational attractive effect is.

This effect could be easily attributed to a new repulsive force, a fifth interaction, whose existence would involve a confutation of the Galileo's principle which affirms that all masses fall in the vacuum of a gravitational field with the same acceleration.

• An attractive difference of masses with the same value but with a different radius or a different spatial distribution would occur as a further effect.

• Consequently, passing to more general considerations, the terminal wavelength of a macroscopic body composed by several elementary wave sources would be connected to the value of the effective wavefront of the waves totally deriving from the body.

Moreover, this "effective" wavefront would be a function of the parallelism of the waves deriving from the body and would depend on the spatial distribution of the elementary sources constituting it, and consequently on the "form" of the body.

• Bodies of equal mass and density but different in forms can have different terminal velocities.

• A disk moving in vacuum in the direction of its axis can attain with the same energy a velocity speeder than a sphere with the same mass. 

(And probably this will make ufologists happy).

• As a logic inevitable consequence, a disk in vacuum can be accelerated more easily in the direction of its axis, rather than in the direction of its diameter.

• A pole will absorb greater energy for attaining a certain velocity in vacuum when its axis is turned in the direction of its velocity, rather than when its axis is perpendicular to it.

• Materials with the same mass but with a different molecular structure or a different nuclear structure would have different weights, since they would be attracted in different ways.

At cosmic level, material real observers should verify that all masses have rates of departure from masses close to the terminal mass.In that case, indeed, the repulsive force can overcome the attractive gravitational force.

Besides, the farther the observer is, the speeder the rates of departure are, seeing that widening the field of observation, he includes a greater number of masses in his observation.

All of that easily leads us to imagine that in the universe the black holes and the stars of neutrons would have a little probability of existing.

Naturally, that upsets the framework till now introduced by astrophysicists and cosmologists, and destroys dozen years of research on the first micro - nano - pico seconds from the birth of the mythical big bang, making useless many researchers' studies of a lifetime on the hypothetical structure of the products of the extreme matter concentration: the black holes

Anyway, an astrophysicist or cosmologist, whose success has been achieved after many years of academic relations, lectures, articles in specialized magazines, successful books, lessons and seminars, is unlikely to deny a whole life devoted to the search for a non-existent ghost.

BY THE WAY, WE HAVE TO LAUNCH AN APPEAL TO A PERSONALITY WHO HAS BEEN WELL-KNOWN FOR A LONG TIME, CONSIDERED AS THE MESSIAH OF THE STANDARD MODEL COSMOLOGY:

WE HAVE TO SAY SOMETHING TO STEPHEN HAWKING: WE ARE SORRY FOR YOU, WHO HAVE SURELY WON THE BET WARDING OFF ILL-LUCK MADE IN 1975 WITH YOUR FRIEND KIP THORNE TO MAKE SURE THAT, AFTER ALL, THE BLACH HOLES WERE NOT UNSUCCESSFULL.

MAKE HIM PAY YOU THEREFORE A FOUR YEARS' SUBSCRIPTION TO THE "PRIVATE EYE" AS A CONSOLATION PRIZE FOR HAVING DEVOTED YOUR LIFE TO "WHAT DOES NOT EXIST" .

NO ASTRONOMER CAN EVER IDENTIFY THE EXISTENCE OF A BLACK HOLE IN CYGNUS X-1 FOR THE FACT THAT THE BLACK HOLES CANNOT EXIST. *

* (Taken from: Albert was right: God does not play dice).

And in order to justify the expanding universe, it would be no longer necessary to resort to the Big Bang hypothesis that is unlikely from the relativistic viewpoint.

E. Fischbach, in 1985, found systematic deviations of the gravitational effects measured by Eötvos on materials with the same mass but with different nature. These deviations seemed to coincide with the gravitational anomalies verified in real orbits followed by artificial satellites, considerably different from those calculated according to the gravitational law.

P. Tiebeger of the university of Seattle, on the occasion of the annual School of Cosmology of 1990 informed Varenna of performing new experiments: he had immersed a copper sphere into water whose weight was equivalent to that of the volume of water displaced.

He demonstrated the existence of a repulsive, antigravitational effect acting in a different way in copper and water, when the tank got closer to a rocky mass placed orthogonally to the vertical one.

Afterwards, P. Boynton, astronomer at the university of Washington, verified the existence of some antigravitational effects through a torsional pendulum composed by a toroid constituted by two different materials (aluminum and beryllium).

The period of a pendulum, firstly well verified as a constant, changed when it got closer to a rocky wall, depending on which of the two materials was closer to the wall.

In 1995, the daily newspaper "L'Unità" reported the news of an experiment for verifying the existence of a 5° repulsive antigravitational force. Professor Focardi, physicist at the University of Bologna, (one of the three discoverers of the cold fusion with Nickel announced in Siena a year and half ago) had performed qualified experiments in a tunnel under an artificial lake of ENEL (The Italian National Electricity Board).

These sound experiments verified the existence of an antigravitational force depending on the change in the mass of the water of lake coincident with changes in level in occasion of emptyings and piloted fillings.

("The Unified Field" that foresaw the existence of a fifth repulsive interaction was published in 1984).

• (Curiosity - Two days before the lecture given by Focardi, Piantelli and Habel in Siena, in which they said not to understand the theoretical reasons of their results with Nickel at all, I was handing out my book "Albert was right: God doesn't play dice", in the bookcases of Siena, in which I displayed a - not ad hoc- sound and unitary theoretical explanation of cold fusion to advantage).

• (The Unified Field, that has been publishing since 1984, foresaw the existence of a nuclear force, not so much strong, depending on the fact that the model of the elementary particles of the W.F.T considered: the absence of an electrostatic repulsive force among the protons of a nucleus at the nuclear distance of 1 Fermi ).

• [Reprimand as for the open-mindedness of Professor Focardi]. After receiving both from me and from others a copy of "Albert was Right - God doesn't play dice", he decidedly denied any involvement in the new "Wave Field Theory " in his future researches.