Make your own free website on


There is divergence of opinions about the truth, strategy, and nature of the people etc. I think that opinions cannot converge unless we agree on common principles. So, we have diverse opinions on almost every issue. For example, today a world-class zoo of primates cannot be settled and raised without some controversy because there are several similarities and dissimilarities among the primates. Several scientific systems of classification have emerged from observation of morphological characteristics of these animals.  It is educational to compare and contrast, categorize and segregate different primates including several varieties of monkeys. Experts would like to accommodate all kinds of monkeys, apes, tarsiers, gorilla, orrington, chimpanzee, and lemurs, but hardly any one would like to accommodate a human being in the zoo, either out of prejudice or for the simple reason that he has no tail, though we know that people still retain some of the characteristics of a monkey e.g. a vestigial tail etc. All zoos generally compete for rare animals; they often exchange animals to make their zoo the best zoo. All of them want maximum visitors and maximum funds from government. Species which have threat of extinction finds special care.

Some of the characters of zoo mentioned above are easily recognized by means of a simple parallel in the science. Let us ask the quaint question: How to define a zoo of physical science and what are its salient characteristics? An answer similar in kind to the one given above might be that a zoo of physical science, includes, of course, pure physicists, applied scientists of all kinds, quantum physicists, relativists, thermo dynamist and astronomers, as well as many chemists and even a few biologists, however, they cannot be defined with precision as the dividing line between them is not very sharp. Experts  will surely leave alchemist and perpetual motionist out of consideration as they are already excommunicated species from science, their inclusion would be challenged by scientists on the ground that they are ignorant person bent to violate sacrosanct scientific laws and reluctant to  follow their holy scientific method. Nevertheless, we know that alchemist and perpetual motionist have been forerunner of science. They are the oldest scientist on the earth, and their noble characteristics and  spirit that impart them ability to remain invariably seeker after truth is hardly found in the modern scientist who is largely governed by corporate interests today.


Deva Ramananda laments over the increased specialization and academic separation between science and the humanities nearly a half century ago.  Before 17th century, science existed in the form of natural philosophy that encompassed all essential knowledge related with the study of nature. Gradually, with establishment of science, physics and chemistry were the only privileged subjects considered as sciences. As a result of further development, various branches of science emerged. Today word science is loosely applied even to mathematics, psychology sociology, and a host of other disciplines. Due to increased specialization, gradually, science became very much insular by its very nature. In general, today chemists vie with each other about chemical formula, read and write about chemistry, zoologist study animals, dissect them and write about zoology, and physicists debunk perpetual motion, ridicule a perpetual motionist,  they glorify putative laws of thermodynamics or theory of relativity, they overplay mathematics which may have no correspondence to the reality, yet they claim that physics is the most objective science based on observation of facts and its theory rigorously verified by experiments. But all of these claims bite dust and appear like myths when one come to realize that science is not free from prejudice, close-mindedness, cultural bias, cheating and fraud. It is illusion to say that scientist rigorously follows scientific method and scientist is not influenced by extraneous considerations in his pursuit of scientific enquiry. “Scientists are human, and have personal and professional interests just like anyone else, and like anyone else, they will work to protect their interests whenever possible. They have the same range of personality types as can be found in the general public. There are tremendously gullible scientists, power mongers, professional bastards, you name it.”[i] It is not difficult to see what singular interest scientists have developed now: they suppress anything which does not serve their interest. They all compete for money, name and fame.  In order to get more funds, scientists compete with others but in doing so they might decide to compete by hook and crook to justify their research projects. They would leave no stone unturned to convince the funding agencies that they and their researches are more important than any other field of science. Thus, they will debunk perpetual motion as something impossible, and a waste of time, money and energy, but at the same time, they may proudly propose sending a multi-million dollar space mission to a remote planet to exploit energy source there. If the funding agencies agree, it could create problems for the remaining sciences. Another fantastic way to get more money is to create a superhero - a superhero like Einstein, but since perpetual motion does not serve to the interest of energy capitalists, they would be hardly pleased to know anything about Orffyreus and his invention; they would shrug their shoulders upon any suggestion of the reinvestigation of the case. They would simply ridicule the idea because scientific authorities in past had already debunked perpetual motion and considered Orffyreus as trickster. Because of such prejudice, there is great government support for relativistic research but none for the perpetual motion. “The Theory of Relativity enjoys a disproportionate share of federal funding of physics research today.[ii] In at least one case that research has been unsuccessful. The $365 million dollar LIGO project has failed to detect the gravity waves predicted by relativity.”[iii] Prestigious scientists such as Feynman who appeared to be members of the cult were probably just pretending to believe in order to obtain government grant money. It's obvious that relativist scientists are just a big money-making cult. In addition, they need government grant money, which under the super-secret Protocol Act  of 1942, can only go to scientists who agree with Einstein.”[iv]


Rationale for the Present Study


I write this with great reluctance and after long hesitation. When I first read Einstein, I failed to understand relativity; I only thought that I had a poor intellect.  When I read second time, I found that others greatly praised him, and probably because of Placebo effect, soon I also found that Einstein’s logic and sense of reality as “cosmic religious feeling” impressed me. However, more I read, the more I had questions about the theory of relativity which seemed to me a product of his “cosmic religious feeling”. As time went on, gradually, his works appeared to me to become more and more unreasonable and unscientific. I could never relish the idea that velocity of the light is absolute and the equation E=MC2 has any scientific validity. My disillusionment became deeper when I began to study General Relativity which supposedly explained gravity as a phenomena resulting from the distortion of space caused by the presence of matter. I found that General Relativity completely fails to explain creative nature of gravity as revealed by Vedas and as demonstrated by Orffyreus Gravity Wheel which by creating energy out of nothing also violates first law of thermodynamics, I argued, the energy created by Orffyreus wheel is not at any expense of any kind of annihilation of matter, thus, raises the question over the validity of E=MC2. So after I plunged into perpetual motion, things changed drastically. I lost faith in infallibility and greatness of Einstein and also his so called scientific works. “The greatness and importance of any physical theory may be measured by the amount of philosophical reactions it provokes though we know that it does not necessarily shows the correctness or the scientific value of a theory-”[v], therefore, I decided to review relativity in the light of perpetual motion that was truly invented by Orffyreus around 1712.


As a perpetual motionist and a lifelong student of perpetual motion and its history, I must say, I sit in dismay at the present state of physics. Some theories are held in admiration like the Word of God, but others, equally sound theories, face a fierce criticism like blasphemy to god. Because of uncertainty of truth and discord with perpetual motion and religion, physics has become the target of religious fundamentalist, creationist and equally of perpetual motionist.  Physics has been caught in a cultural crossfire.  An arrogant cult of physicists that speaks in mathematical parables further jeopardizes this problem. Like thousand headed monstrous hydra, mathematical abstraction is increasing day by day which has no physical correspondence with reality, and physicists by using their mathematical wizardry act as if they are the priests of a type of mystery religion beyond our understanding. I see no difference between prescriptions of crazy alchemists and mathematical jargon of physicists.  This plays into the hands of skeptics, charlatan and mystics of all kinds and leaves us in confusion and contempt of the whole subject. Scientist is often prejudiced about perpetual motion, its inventor and his methods. They have not worked hard to understand perpetual motion. Either physicists were doubtful about the existence of such principle or were doubtful about any success in finding it, or took no interest in thinking about it, or were oblivious to its practical importance when found by other inventors.


It is interesting to watch a master walking with a Puppy. Master always walks in a straight line while the Puppy moves zigzag in all direction, sniffing into every corner, into everything that comes around his way. Most of scientists are like master, who have habit of going linearly according to tradition. Perpetual motionists like me prefer to walk like a Puppy. The issue for me as a critique is that I do not tend to side with opinion of a majority, I do   not think in a purely linear way, which is the way the present education system generally teaches.  The criticism of anything is not a kind of scholastic play to sooth our nerves. The playing field of a skeptic or a rational thinker is that of facts, evidence, objectivity, intuitive feel, and experience that is capable of validation by senses, perception, reason and logic, cross-verification of facts and evidence that must all unite to all threads and ends of a proposed theory that claims to explains a particular phenomenon. If a critique is expected to adjust his thinking in order to conform to the opinion of majority, he eventually loses his capability for original thinking.  In terms of beliefs, I have vacillated between irrationality and rationality, science and spirituality. With passage of time, as my thinking processes and impulses matured, I cultivated the faculty of examining all systems and forms of thought and opinions, from whatever source they were received and only accept those that accords with reason, logic and understanding. As a result, I have turned more skeptical about the truths of fundamental laws of science, theory of relativity, and Einstein’s integrity as a perfect scientist and philosopher, moreover, after making my investigations into the Orffyreus, and examining  facts and evidences that support his perpetual motion unequivocally, I will tell you frankly that I have difficulties now in believing the truth of theory of relativity, laws of thermodynamics and modern cosmology as compared to my belief in the truth of perpetual motion, yoga, astrology, mythology, UFOs, pyramid power, faith healing, all psychic phenomena, talking to dead people, crystals, spiritualism, Gnosticism and self-revelation, and so on which are considered, more or less, as pseudoscience by the scientific community. I believe in them as Hamlet said to Horatio: 'There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.' I believe in these fringe areas because in my opinion facts and evidences that support these phenomena are stronger than the case of theory of relativity based on unproven postulates, and the laws of thermodynamics which are based on erroneous foundations of impossibility of perpetual motion. Both of these theories are based on airy-fairy concepts that are resting on the shaky foundation of arguments, stories, fairy tales, and tautological statements. Let me give example of a tautological statement here like this 1. “Since no one has invented a perpetual motion machine, energy cannot be created.” 2. “Because perpetual motion is impossible, therefore the law of conservation of energy”. From the point of view of pure logic, it manifestly contains a flagrant fallacy of ‘petitio principii’. Such a fallacy is committed wherever it is argued that a proposition is true simply on the basis that it has not been proved false or that it is false because it has not been proved true. But our ignorance of how to prove or disprove a proposition clearly does not establish either the truth or the falsehood of that proposition. You will find physics full of such circular arguments and reasoning whenever it attempts to define fundamental categories of physics. Thermodynamics, which rejects perpetual motion without a critical study into the genuine cases of perpetual motion of prominent inventors like Edward Somerset, Orffyreus, Drebbel, Tesla etc is worse than science fiction.  Based on erroneous postulates, the theory of relativity which was stimulated and created by “cosmic religious feeling” of Einstein is spurious metaphysical fiction. Who has courage to correct his “cosmic religious feeling”? It’s a personal matter, Einstein is a fundamentalist who speaks for himself, since physicists are his followers, no one can guide them to study the case of Orffyreus and let them learn the truth of perpetual motion from there.


Today, fundamentalism is not restricted to Christianity, Islam or Hinduism, the major religions, but it can be seen in physics with its greatest impact on an innocent perpetual motionist, he is being most affected by it that prevents him to construct his splendid perpetual motion machine in an atmosphere of freedom. They have totally stifled his spirit of enquiry. The fundamentalism that prevails in science on account of great authorities prevents their follower physicists to accept the truth of perpetual motion. The fundamentalism can most clearly be seen in their hard-core theories, bedrock belief in the inerrancy of the law of conservation of energy and the theory of relativity. While there are numerous contradictions, obvious errors and serious problems with these mystical doctrines in physics, the physicist, being a fundamentalist, simply ignores them at worst, and applies circular, tortured, twisted logic, in a vain effort to explain their sacrosanct theories at best. Anyone who takes the time to seriously study Einstein will note how many glaring errors, irreconcilable problems there are with the theory of relativity that puts a question mark whether it is some kind of religion incomprehensible to us, or something else which we cannot know, hence, we have the prime rationale to make A Critical Study of Albert Einstein’s Religion of Relativity and His High Priesthood of Physics that has Kept Cult of Relativist Hypnotized, and the Progress of Physics Stalled for A Century, in the Light of Vedic Perpetual Motion and Gravity Wheel Invented by Councilor Orffyreus (1681-1745) !”.


 Objectives of Present Study


As already stated, this website is intended for those who would like to understand perpetual motion and at the same time, the failure of the theory of relativity to reflect anything significant about true nature of gravity and energy in general, hence to fail to cope up with problem of energy crisis like perpetual motion in a simple practical manner. The website is especially well suited for those who aspire to one day add to our knowledge of perpetual motion; for researchers in the field of  science and technology of ‘Energy Creation’ or Free energy. One of the great achievements of Orffyreus in 18th century was to invent mechanisms of perpetual motion. As his technology fascinated a large number of inventors, various forms of perpetual motion emerged later, therefore, the perpetual motion expanded from the traditional Gravity Wheel to include miscellaneous kinds of free energy devices. The purpose of this website is to help you explore some very foundational elements of perpetual motion, especially, those most important for understanding perpetual motion. In it, you will learn some of the laws of perpetual motion and discover how they can enable anything to remain in perpetual motion and therefore, create free energy. You will also see how the laws of thermodynamics are erroneously defined by the alleged impossibility of perpetual motion; we will also see that there are no constraints physical laws places on perpetual motion. During later half, we will focus on mechanical and metaphysical aspects of perpetual motion, including it’s parallelism with Vedanta.

In this web site, my aim is to transform the poetic character of Einstein’s often cryptic religious musings about harmony of the universe into a more plausible position of a religion, to show that his theory of relativity is part and the product of his ‘cosmic religious feelings’[vi] under the garb of the mysterious credentials of scientific and religious speculation. In this web site, I will demonstrate some of the experimental facts about Orffyreus’ Gravity perpetual motion that stands contrary to relativity theory. I shall also present other experimental facts that contradict relativity. I shall discuss some of logical inconsistencies of relativity and offer alternatives for your consideration. I will also deal with the controversies associated with some of Einstein’s ideas and how they first originated. In the end, we will attempt to discover scientific causes of his popularity.


To be precise, this website mainly deals with the Einstein’s theory of relativity, his priest-craft and his priesthood of physics. (1) as his theory appears to a Vedic perpetual motionist in the light of true knowledge of Vedic perpetual motion, and in the light of Orffyreus’ gravity wheel, (2) as his theory has been taught to the students to spoil their minds, (3) as his theory appears to his  sycophants as well as other kinds of opponents (4) as his theory a product of plagiarism and (4) as  his theory a springboard to his career, and also to find out   Einstein's Modus Operandi and causes of his popularity that made Einstein a great Messiah of physics in spite of false nature of his theories. The present study is first attempt of its kind to compare Einstein, a scientist with Orffyreus, a perpetual motionist, and the theory of relativity with perpetual motion. The present study is not propagandistic in any sense of the term. It represents an attempt to appraise the wealth of contradictory, conflicting works concerning Einstein and marvelous works of Orffyreus which will guide science policy makers to put question mark on any inclusion of relativity theory in school and college curriculum but at the same time, inclusion of perpetual motion, and guide those scientists and perpetual motionists who have desire to succeed in perpetual motion, and have any latent desire to raise themselves to the level of Einstein, using dynamics of his religion, priest craft and guru-dom if they want so.


I conducted spiritual research into the life of Einstein to understand his spiritual background and how far he had gained and progressed spiritually in his lifetime. To determine whether his theory of relativity is a religion or not, the resources available for analysis are extremely diffused, scant and scattered in Einstein’s personal letters, his interviews and reports. Fortunately, besides some rare books on Einstein and his religious views e.g. Max Jammer’s book “Einstein and Religion: Physics and Theology,”[vii] at our disposal, we have a number of popular quotes by Einstein that provide sufficient information to understand his philosophy of religion, personality, attitude, and his method of enquiry etc. Without easily available Einstein’s quotes, the present study would have been entirely impossible were it not for the fact that there is a relatively high degree of agreement in the descriptions of Einstein’s behavior, sentiments and attitudes reflected by his  quotes and the personality of a priest, his amazing priest craft and miracles. What we need is a realistic appraisal of the great priest Einstein, his priest craft along with his miracles to find out any meaning in his quotes. I am heavily relying on his quotes more than anything else. They are indeed spontaneous expressions of hidden invariables in his personality that finally led him to invent his theory of relativity.


Einstein was a scientist, an artist, a philosopher, a rebel, a plagiarist and a mystic. He can hardly be considered as an original thinker as he was a strange mixture of all of them that has left his ineradicable mark in the collective consciousness of the world. Consequently, Einstein became the greatest showman of science. After lapse of a century, despite the wealth of contrary evidence, facts that have accumulated, and existence of many better alternative theories today, we want to know what the constraints are now? Why is it still mandatory that his ‘relativity show’ must go forever in circus of modern physics? With this as a basis, it seemed worthwhile to proceed with the present study filling in the gap with knowledge gained from experience in dealing with Don Quixote or Professor Otto Liedenbrock type of individuals of a similar type. I suppose we can come up with something along these lines. I will   keep my description as brief as possible and make it readable to the layman. I am aware of my finitude and limitations that this is not a totally satisfactory procedure from a scientific point of view- but, may I know if there exists anything scientific in theory of relativity, laws of thermodynamics   and cosmology today? So, I think it is the only reasonable method at the present time. Throughout the study, I have tried to be as objective as possible in evaluating Einstein’s strengths as well as his weaknesses. It is hoped that the study may be helpful in gaining deeper insights into the Albert Einstein, the ‘Messiah of physics,’ and his sermons of relativity, it may be hoped that the present study may serve as a guide for welfare of students, educationists and our perpetual motion activities as well as our future plans to improve the structure of physics. I feel that the learning would be of value to all perpetual motionists, scientists as well as cult of relativists.

Notes and References


[i] Hank Campbell, Extremist Domination Even In The Science Nation

Science 2.0 Join the Revolution. | February 18th 2011 04:17 PM |

The quote is part of comments by


[ii] The Democratic Congress insisted on the $250 million LIGO project despite substantial criticism by scientists that it was wasting scarce research dollars. John Travis, "LIGO: a $ 250 million gamble; Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory; includes related article," Science p. 612 (Apr. 30, 1993). "Adding to the acrimony is LIGO's $ 250 million price tag, which some hold responsible for NSF's recent funding woes." Id.



[v] V.V. Raman, ibid

[vi] Max Jammer, Einstein and Religion: Physics and Theology (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999), p. 78. In an article entitled “Religion and Science” that was published by the New York Times Magazine late fall 1930, Einstein called mystical headspring of his scientific speculations a “cosmic religious feeling.  

[vii] Max Jammer, Einstein and Religion: Physics and Theology (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999), p. 67.  


 In writing of his article “The Cosmic and the Comic: Einstein’s Scientific Spirituality” Glenn Statile has followed the sequence presented in chapter 2 of Jammer. These are the major known declarations of Einstein on the subject of science and religion.  There were however many other short quotes dealing with this subject over the course of his life.

For those who might find it of interest let me briefly enumerate Einstein’s major statements on the relationship between science and religion. Glenn Statile states the sources as follows:


1) Early 1930 – An interview given by Einstein to J. Murphy and J.W.N. Sullivan under

    the title “Science and God.”

2) Fall, 1930 – “What I believe.” Written after discussion with Indian poet Rabindranath


3) Late Fall, 1930 – “Religion and Science” (November 9, 1930 in the New York Times Magazine).

4) Fall, 1932 – “Credo” Text from phonographic original.

5) January, 1936 – Reply to a sixth grade student named Phyllis Wright.

6) May, 1939 – “The Goal,” for a conference held at the Princeton Theological Seminary.

7) September, 1940 – “Science and Religion,” given at conference held at the Union Theological Seminary in New York.

8) June, 1948 – “Religion and Science: Irreconcilable?” is printed in The Christian Union Register.

9) January, 1951 – Letter in response to Maurice Solovine.

10) January, 1951 – “The Need for Ethical Culture,” Public Forum of the Ethical Culture Society.

11) December, 1952 – Letter in response to Mrs. Beatrice F..

12) Summer, 1954 – Interview with Professor William Hermanns.