Pioneer 10 anomaly calling into question Einstein’s second postulate

Based on the anomalous acceleration acting on Pioneer 10 with a magnitude of 8.7×10^-10 m/s² directed towards the Sun, we can demonstrate that there is serious indication that the anomaly is due to the use of a wrong Doppler shift formula by the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL).

Indeed if we compare the result given by the formula used by JPL based on the Einstein’s second postulate, and the result given by the classic Galilean velocity addition formula, we found exactly the value of the anomalous acceleration acting on Pioneer 10 toward the Sun.

I – How did JPL discovered the ∼8 ×10⁻¹⁰ m/s² anomalous acceleration?

In the Pioneer 10 mission a ground station was sending a radio signal with frequency f_t  to the probe, then the signal was sending back synchronously to the ground station which received it at the frequency f_r.

With the Doppler shift of the radio signal, JPL was able to calculate very precisely the speed of the probe, and with the evolution of the speed they had the acceleration which was more precisely a deceleration as the probe was attracted by the whole Solar system.

With that attraction, according to the universal law of gravitation and the well-known positions of the Sun, planets and all masses in the solar system, they calculated very precisely how far was the probe from us.

The problem is that one second later the velocity of the probe should have decelerated of exactly that gravity attraction they just calculated, but no, it has decelerate a small amount more, very small, ∼ 8.7 ×10⁻¹⁰ m/s², but still, it was not normal.

II – Relativistic Doppler shift formula used by JPL

The formula used by JPL was the well-known relativistic Doppler shift formula which is:

With f_s the sent frequency, fr the received frequency, β=v ⁄ c and v the velocity between the emitter and the receptor.

As there is two way for the signal, up to the probe, and down sent back synchronously to the ground station, the total round trip formula is:

And with that JPL was able to deduce the velocity v of the probe:

III – Classic Galilean Doppler shift formula:

For the way up of the signal to the probe, with v the velocity of the probe going away from the Earth, (let’s temporary consider that the Earth is stationary with the Sun as we will see that it’s equilibrates itself on the long-term, evolving from -30 km.s^-1 to   +30 km.s^-1) the formula is:

For the return trip of the signal, in the classical Galilean referential, the probe is stationary and is sending the signal with the speed of c in its reference frame toward the Earth which is moving away from it with the velocity v, so the return formula is the same, and total round trip formula is:

Let’s consider that the Galilean formulas are the good one. In that case JPL would still calculate the probe velocity with (3) but the received frequency fr would depend of a different « real velocity » than the one found by JPL and we can express the velocity calculated by JPL, V_jpl  with the « real velocity » v of the probe (two different velocity, one « real » and, from it, another one « calculated by JPL ») :

Which can be simplified not depending of the sent frequency f_s to:

IV – Solar system attraction calculation:

The solar system is attracting the probe with the respect of the universal gravitation law with all its masses M and the distance d to the probe:

As (8) is the real acceleration, each second the real velocity is changing to v – a and the velocity calculated by JPL V_jpl  expressed with the real velocity is changing to:

At the beginning JPL simply observed the deceleration with v_jpl – v_jpl2 which is (7) – (9) and deduced from that deceleration the distance between Pioneer 10 and the solar barycenter. Then each second after the two values, the velocity changing and the gravity should began to match every seconds.

But the attraction found with the JPL velocity variation was always bigger than the gravity attraction… And one of the first time they study precisely that anomalous acceleration, in the beginning of 1979, when the distance of the probe was 2 639 951 413 000 m and its velocity 13 748.9869 m.s^-1 (source NASA Horizon) they found 8.74 ×10⁻¹⁰ m/s²  more toward the Sun in the velocity variation than in the gravity.

And if JPL did a mistake using relativistic formula (3) instead of classic Galilean formula (5) then the mistake is exactly equal to:

(7) – (9) – (8)

Doing the calculation (thanks to Wolfram!) we found:

 

 

 

 

Which is almost exactly what JPL found at the epoch.

V – Decreasing difference

Now if we change for the velocity and distance of almost two months later so for example February the 21th of 1979 with v= 13729.7344 m.s^-1 and d = 2 701 676 943 000 we now found an anomaly of only 8.32453.10^-10 m/s²

And more than two year and a half later on October the 10th of 1981, v = 13 360.8107 m.s^-1, d = 3 827 209 369 000 and we find less than half of what we add at the beginning: 4.08073.10^-10 m/s²

The difference between the speed variation and the gravitation is exponentially decreasing:

But they naturally thought that this offset of unknown origin should be constant at around 8.7.10^-10 m.sec^-2. In the total absence of explanation on the origin of a phenomenon that was found precisely on a certain date we are inclined to think that it will be exactly the « same value » later as it’s the « same phenomenon ».

And from that moment they began to literally search this exactly offset of 8.7.10^-10 m.sec^-2 in all subsequent calculations. But the anomaly was less and less important in reality. This is a rather exemplary case of the experimenter effect, where a scientist makes his experimental results tend towards the result he seeks.

VI – Earth movement

At this point, and in those new conditions, it’s important to remind that the up trip of the signal, from Earth to the probe, is potentially influenced by the velocity of the Earth around the Sun from -30 km.s^-1 to +30 km.s^-1 depending on the period of the year.

Here is the well identified by JPL Doppler shift year variation due to the Earth movement:

Even if the variation equilibrate itself in average from -30 km.s^-1 to +30 km.s^-1 I’m not sure to well understand why it has not been also considered as an anomaly at the epoch…

VII – Conclusion

Changing the relativistic formula (3) for the classic Galilean formula (5) in the Doppler shift calculation is equivalent to say that the electromagnetic wave obey to the velocities addition in a Galilean referential in some certain conditions (vacuum, no gravity, …).

Anderson wisely speculated that this would be interesting if the Pioneer anomaly was new physics, and perhaps after studying more deeply the hypothesis proposed in this article we’ll have to change the second postulate to something like:

Electromagnetic wave obey to the velocity addition and are emitted by the matter which produce them at the exact speed of c in their reference frame and in vacuum (without any Lorentz transformation of course).

We will have to study also if, has I think, in the case of a reflection, the new law apply on the emitted signal by the mirror, whatever the incoming signal velocity is.

The time travel

For Christmas a little walk ! :) But to travel in the past or in the future we must first well understand what is the time …

And in fact intuitively everyone has a pretty good idea of ​​what it is, for example, we all know that if the time stopped suddenly, everything would become simply immobile at once. What we know perhaps a little less is that we could no longer see this « immobile » world, since light itself would be stationary and would not reach us anymore, but hey, that’s alright, and basically we all have a good « intuition » of what is the time… Because time is not so complicated, time is the movement of everything in the universe, if we « slow down » these movements (we’ll see how further) then time slows. And if the movements are « reverse » then the time go back. Finally, if movements are accelerated time accelerates.

There is another thing that should be noticed, and this is important because this is what will allow us to travel in time, it’s that the speed of these movements are not necessarily the same everywhere in the universe : the movements can stop only in a well defined area of ​​the universe and continue normally elsewhere. Or they can go « faster » in an area, and then the time is passing more rapidly in it than in the rest of the universe.

So time is not « absolute » in the universe, this is not something abstract, that embrace the whole universe, almost « separated » from the universe even, no, the time is very concrete, it is the movements, if we stop them all, then we stops the time !.. Quite simply if I may.

And here it is our « means of transport » in time ! If we keep the « normal » time in a machine and we do go back all the movements of the universe (or only the solar system to remain modest :) ) then we « travel » in the past !

But many fantasies are related to travel in the past, to « meet oneself » for example … This is misunderstanding how the time travel in the past is working because as we have seen if a traveler wants to go back in time in a region of the universe then it must reverse all the movements of this area except his own… Indeed the traveler should not go back, otherwise he would not travel in the past finally, he would return with the entire area (and not even being aware of what happens…). So the « matter » of the traveler, inside the machine continues its normal path in time, but it means that this « matter » of the traveler, is no longer « part » of the universe that goes back outside the machine…

And that’s extremely important to take into consideration because that means that this area go back into a different past from what it was ! a past without the « matter » of the traveler… To well understand an example : imagine that the traveler just before boarding his machine had a discussion in a bar with a friend. At the beginning of the trip all the matter in the area of ​​the universe comes back, so the friend « heads » backwards towards the bar. The traveler does not heads backwards to the bar, he’s in the machine, he’s excluded from the area turning back. When the friend arrived at the bar he do not encounter the traveler, the « matter of the traveler, » as it is in the machine… So he talks to alone ?

No, he’s not, he « will » not speak « anymore » we can say, since he has no more interlocutor… Even if the universe evolves in reverse direction the rules of the interactions of matter continues to be be respected, they are just in reverse : for example, if an object had bounced on another, so if we go back this area and remove one of the two object, the one that remains does not rebound alone in this « new past », he continues his course, in the reverse direction of course, but this time without bouncing, so in a different past from what it was, because the matter in presence itself is different.

More generally, excluding a part of the material from one area of ​​the universe that comes back is a butterfly effect « in reverse » in that area, the « reversed » events will change more and more compared to what they were as the « initial difference » will spread, and gradually all the events « will » be different from what they had been.

So what about killing a « parent » !? it makes us disappear suddenly ? Let study this case : a traveler travel back in time, in fact we saw, we should say instead « all the movements of a region of the universe return back except those of a traveler. » The parent goes back, but in a world WITHOUT the traveler who is in the machine. As we saw, gradually interactions that the traveler made do not occur in reverse as they had been made by him and this leads to a different past. To such an extent that even the mother does not gives birth to the child !! Indeed the matter of the traveler did not come back, and thus he did not become back a baby, and her mother is not « going » to be « pregnant » of the traveler because the baby did not « come » back… She will do something else :) … All the « parents » of the traveler are gone back, but in a past that ended up to be completely different from what it was when the traveler was there. In short, if the machine stop and the passenger kill any of its parent, well nothing happens, he or she does not disappear .. (he just goes to jail because you can bet that the police of that time will not believe his history !! :) )

OK, enough with theory, now to practice ! :)

So, to travel in time in a region of the universe, we must influence the movements in the area, slow down, speed up, or even reverse… But how ?

One of the central « parameter » of movements, so of time, is inertia. Inertia is the resistance to the speed change of an object, the acceleration or slowdown. Usually we are not very aware of inertia because it is proportional to the mass and generally we are moving relatively light objects, but for example you can feel it well when you have to push someone on a swing, especially if the person is heavy. Inertia, proportional to the mass, is the « center » of the way movements behave and therefore inertia/mass is in the « center » of how time passe.

Then, one of the central problem to solve to travel in time, to change the mouvements of one region of the universe, is to change the inertia in this area.

There is two possibilities : either we change the inertia of an entire area and the passenger keep his, or it is the traveler who changes his own inertia in its machine and the entire universe keeps his. We see immediately that the difficulty with the first solution is that you have to influence the inertia of an entire region, large enough (about a solar system let’s say), to increase it or decrease it compared to a traveler who would keep his… In practice it is a little difficult to implement…

On the other hand influencing the inertia of a confined area is much easier to imagine… If we were able to increase the inertia/mass in a machine that would effectively make harder all mouvements changes, for example pushing at the same force the person on the swing would move him more slowly. All movements change in the machine would be more « difficult », the time would be « slowed down ». And since outside of the machine in the world, time always passe normally, well this is it ! we travel in the future !! :) .. The traveler in the machine see everything in the world moving very quickly, and seen from the world, in his machine, he seems almost immobile.

But beware, as for the trip in the past we do not travel in the same future as if we had participated in this world, inevitably, because we are in the machine, so we are away from the world, we have no influence on it, and it evolve without us. But still, it evolves « in the future » relatively to the traveler, this is the most important, and we will arrive 20 years later discovering new technologies, and of course people will have 20 years more than us he he :)

At the opposite if we reduce the inertia in a small area, in a machine, all movements will happen faster, and thus the time passe faster than in the universe.

There it is :) In conclusion, I think that going back in time to the past, even in a small area, is almost certainly, and unfortunately, impossible, and even if it was possible, we saw that it would be under certain conditions, for example in any case it wouldn’t be instantly, it would take « some time », a « backward time », the time to do EVERYTHING « move » in the area back, in any case a « door » that would project us instantly years back could not exist, it would simply misunderstanding the time itself to imagine that way of traveling back in time.

On the over hands traveling in the future is probably possible, by just « simply » increasing the inertia/mass of a traveler in a machine as we saw, time of the universe would passe normally and the traveler would remain « standing still » so he would travel in the future. Applications can be imagined : a new kind of fridge : the inertia fridge !! it stops the time of the food :) that’s the progress ! At the opposite you can also design an inertia prison, in this case we reduce the inertia of the « traveler prisoner » one minute in the world is for him one year.. prison sentences are executed right at the end of the jugement ! in five minutes :) But for the wine, it’s simply a revolution !! :D ;)

The reflexion of light

One mistake that had the hugest impact in physics come from a very simple phenomenon in appearance : the reflection of light on a mirror. That said the error may be due precisely to this impression of simplicity…

In early optical experiments, at the end of the nineteenth century, we postulated (without explicitly saying it, as it was so obvious (!!)) that the light was reflected by mirrors at the same speed it arrived… As if it was a simple « ball bouncing on a wall » in classical mechanics. All experiments at that time have be made on this postulate, and therefore all conclusion and current theory have been build upon it… It’s a little scarring if we become aware that this postulate is probably false, and that for several reason :

First the light has nothing to do with a ball made of matter, it has no mass, it’s just energy and therefore it obeys to none of the effects of inertia, main responsible of the conservation of speeds in rebound of objects with mass at our scale.

Then the apparently simple reflexion of the light on a mirror is in fact a relatively complex process, a sort of « reaction » with the material. The light, composed of electromagnetic wave, will not always be reflected, depending on the nature of the material it touches it can also be absorbed, thus « disappear » (in fact turn into another form of energy) or refracted. In short light « interferes » with the atoms of the material it encounters in a totally different way than a ball against a wall.

The postulate of the conservation of speed in the reflexion of light is then probably false, and should be replaced by this one : whatever is the speed of light when it attain a mirror, it will interact with its atoms in the same way, and will be re-emitted at a speed of light « relatively » to the mirror itself.

Note that the frequency, quantifying the energy of an electromagnetic wave, is preserved since the « retransmission » is made at the same « rhythm » of the incident light, therefore the energy is preserved also. And since the light has no mass, this speed reduction (or increase if the light was « relatively » less quickly than the object) does not cause either variation of energy.

Here we are, we always considered that light « keeps » its incident speed « bouncing » on a mirror but it is almost certainly not the case and this error had important consequences because after some important experiences » we postulated nothing less than « the speed of light C was always the same, whether emitted by an object in motion or at rest »… Yet we understand why as the assumption is « half true » : the light is effectively always ré-emitted (or produced) at the speed of light C in the reference frame of the emitter (which is in motion or at rest), but the speed of light is certainly not the same in ALL reference frame.

Dormir.. ou pas

Il faut deux choses pour dormir :

1 – Etre fatigué suffisamment (mouarf)
2 – Ne pas être trop sensible au bien-être ou au mal-être

Puisqu’on est souvent suffisamment fatigué, le problème avec le sommeil, principalement, c’est l’état dans lequel on se sent… Si on est trop excité, content, « primesautier » ou plus souvent (comme d’hab..) si on se sent trop mal (trop sensible au mal-être, voir l’introduction : la contrainte d’équilibre).

On s’endort quand on est « en dessous » d’une certaine « tension émotionnelle ». Mais plus on est fatigué, plus le corps fait une exception et accepte une tension élevée… c’est bien foutu. Allez, ce sera plus simple avec un dessin parce que là sinon je vais y passer la nuit.. (à pas dormir en plus…) et puis de toute façon il faut que je me mette à Photoshop :

Voilà c’est pas mal :) … Sur ce schéma plus on est à gauche plus on est fatigué plus on est à droite moins on est fatigué, donc si on se déplace de gauche a droite c’est qu’on se repose, en dormant probablement ;) et si on se déplace de droite à gauche c’est qu’on se fatigue en étant éveillé. Verticalement c’est l’état d’équilibre : plus on est en haut plus on est sensible au mal-être et plus on est en bas plus on est sensible au bien-être. Donc se déplacer vers le haut c’est se sentir bien et se déplacer vers le bas se sentir mal. La ligne horizontale représente le point zéro En gros le point zéro, il faut se dire que plus on s’en éloigne plus on est attiré par lui (comme un élastique qui se tend) plus on en est loin vers le bas plus on est sensible au mal être et plus on en est loin vers le haut plus on est sensible au bien être.

– Dans les zones rouge (enfin rose..) on n’arrive pas à dormir car la tension est trop forte par rapport au niveau de fatigue trop faible.
– Dans les zones bleue on arrive à dormir, la tension est assez faible et on est assez fatigué.

On voit donc bien que plus on est fatigué plus le corps « permet » un déséquilibre important, quand on est très fatigué, même si on est très tendu, et très mal on arrive quand même a s’endormir.. MAIS, et c’est là que c’est moins drôle, en dormant on va être de moins en moins fatigué..! et comme on ne ressent pas de « sensations » en dormant, on va se réveiller.. Et oui.. et là c’est l’insomnie… Mais pendant qu’on est réveillé, pendant l’insomnie, on ve se sentir mal. Pourquoi ? et bien parce qu’on flippe de pas dormir lol … Non :).. mais comme on est « sensible au mal-être » on ressent du mal être quoi.. c’est un moment idéal pour flipper de tout nos problèmes… Et en plus comme on ne dort plus on se fatigue à nouveau… Allez hop un autre dessin de la nuit typiquement pas cool :

1 : le type est trop naze, même s’il est en déséquilibre, prompt à se sentir mal il s’endort quand même. « ZZzzz… »

1 jusqu’à 2 : Il dort… il est donc de moins en moins fatigué mais comme il dort il se déplace de gauche a droite et la zone rouge se rapproche… Il ne bouge pas ni en haut ni en bas, quand on dort on ne ressent rien (enfin si un peu mais on va pas trop compliquer là..)

2 – il est trop dans le rouge il se réveille. « mgrmlrmml ? »

2 jusqu’à 3 : le type se sent mal ET se fatigue donc il se dirige vers le bas ET vers la gauche. Il pense : « merde faut que je dorme, je dors pas, merde.. et pis comment j’vais payer la bagnole.. et chouchou qui sait pas qu’on est mal au niveau tune.. meeerde ptin ca crain.. »

3 – c’est bon il est à nouveau assez crevé ET il s’est rapproché du point zéro comme il a bien flippé alors il est en zone bleue/dodo… « ZZzzz… »

3 jusqu’à 4 : Pareil que de 1 jusqu’à 2 il dort… il est donc de moins en moins fatigué et pas de sensations patati patata..

4 – Pareil que 2 il se re-réveil.. (je lui ai fait vraiment une sale nuit c’est pas gentil..)

4 jusqu’à 5 – le type se sent mal ET se fatigue encore, donc il se dirige vers le bas ET vers la gauche. Il pense : « merde merde je suis encore réveillé mais c’est dingue.. tin je vais être crevé demain .. et pis la bagnole.. tiens si je réveillais chouchou.. Ouais elle voudra pas et pis je vais me faire engueuler alors… tin merde merde.. une bagnole pas payée, deux bagnole pas payée, … »

5 – il se rendort enfin

6 – Le réveil sonne ET il allait se réveiller puisqu’il est en zone rouge encore…

Et voilà, c’était un peu schématisé mais en gros c’est comme ca que ca marche… Conclusion : si vous vous réveiller la nuit essayez de bien flipper rapidement de tout vos problème, (voir de vous pincer) et si vous êtes efficace en 1/4 d’heure ce sera plié vous avez une bonne chance de vous rendormir :)

Belle lune heu belle heu
Où vas-tu là baaas
Belle lune heu belle heu
Que cherches tu làààà

Je cherche un nuaaage
Pour passer la nuiiiiit
Je cherche un nuage
Pour me faire un liiiit

:) ;)

The nightmares

The definition of the wiki is simple and factual : « A nightmare is an unpleasant dream that can cause a strong emotional response from the mind, typically fear but also despair, anxiety and great sadness. »… Anxiety ? « great sadness » !? While sleeping ? How about that ! :)

The state of knowledge on this subject is disparate, we find dozens of explanations, all completely different… I put some of them that I found:

– For Galen, it is a nocturnal asthma (…)
– For Boissier de Sauvages, the anguish of the nightmare is only the consequence of an obstacle to breathing
– For Dubosquet, it is a nervous disease (too strong, all the same are sick! ..)
– For Baillarger Jules, the nightmare is a painful dream (that one is Rantanplan :))
– For Ernest Jones, the nightmare expresses a psychic conflict related to an incestuous desire (…)
– For Michel Collée 1987, the nightmare is related to an unnameable suffering of an alterity that desire arouses, an image that signals the inaccessibility of speech to account for it (humm.. the technique of that one is to make us forget the question :D )

It’s funny at least no ? :) Ok, so, no : the nightmare is one of the notorious symptoms of a significant sensation imbalance, we’ve got them when we are in « lack » of significant amount of « sorrow« . It is a textbook case indeed, it symbolizes by itself all the consequences of the equilibrium constraint

In general we have some control over our feelings, if we « feel bad » we can « hide » it, or « contain » it in a way, but when we sleep this control is « released » and if a large « amount » of « sorrow » has been accumulated and is contained somehow when awake, it « explodes » when we are asleep, when our control is weakened. It wakes us most of the time because we can not feel sensations exceeding a certain threshold when sleeping.

Children of our « modern » societies are the most susceptible to be affected by nightmares, because they have, in general, no reason to feel bad in their nice life. They « have fun » all the time, they play, they don’t really have « real » worries, they are protected, and it’s very good like that. But as a result, they are frequently in a great sensation imbalance, like those Sunday evening for example after having had all that weekend of fun (and not only the children ;) ).

It is with children that we often notes the greatest sensations imbalances, their crying tears are disarming by their lack of « real » of causes, of « explanations »… A little thing will make them sink in a deep sadness incomprehensible for us… Some adults (not necessarily the parents) will get angry by scolding them for crying « without reasons » !… This is one of the most serious mistakes to make with children, it’s terrible to realize that it’s adding pain to someone who already suffers a lot…

Advised parents will know that it is wise in these moments of major crises (such as nightmares, therefore, but not only in fact) to limit their sadness, without hoping to stop it immediately. By a simple presence, taking them in their arms, talking to them, explaining to them that there is nothing to do, and that we understand them, that it is hard yes, but reassure them, and explain that it will pass, because it’s important to teach them how to manage all alone their « sorrow » too. And while waiting we should try to avoid the child to go too far in a strong anguish for example because it mark spirit, especially at this age, and leaves bad traces once an adult, seriously affecting self-confidence for example.

It will be good also later when finished to bounce back on what happened, to continue to explain to them gently, to make small remarks from time to time, on the functioning of our sensations, balance, and all that « equilibrium »… Kids understand right away it’s pretty amazing, much more than all those adults who were cradled with lies based on fairy tales where everyone is happy « forever » at the end…

I said that we can not live sensations exceeding a certain threshold while sleeping, but nevertheless I think that to a certain extent the balance is restored softly during the sleep, but not for « big volumes » therefore, it would be too easy :) ;)

Un coupable !

Une partie du temps on a de bonnes raisons de se sentir bien ou mal et on peut affirmer que c’est à cause de « ceci » ou de « cela ». Mais des fois c’est beaucoup moins évident.. voir pas clair du tout :s

Si on se sent bien sans trop savoir pourquoi ça ne sera pas vraiment un problème, on se dira simplement que la vie est belle ! :D , et on en profitera !! :) Par contre si on se sent mal sans avoir de « raison certaine » on va avoir tendance à en chercher. En effet on est convaincu que notre état est la conséquence directe de « quelque chose », même si c’est « inconscient », et bien sur on pense qu’en « trouvant » cette « chose » on pourra tenter de résoudre le « problème », et donc d’améliorer notre état...

Mais des fois on ne trouve pas facilement ! Pas facilement du tout même ! Evidemment j’ai envie de dire !! :) tout simplement parce qu’il n’y a PAS de raison !! :D on est juste en déséquilibre... Mais on cherche quand même, à l’intérieur par une introspection, et à l’extérieur dans le monde, ou les deux, on suspecte, ça ressemble à une enquête... Il nous FAUT un coupable !.. absolument... Il faut aussi que ce soit un « candidat » raisonnable, on ne peut tout de même pas accuser le voisin silencieux qu’on ne voit jamais.. quoi que.. :) ;)

Si on vit avec quelqu’un on peut facilement tomber dans le piège de le rendre responsable d’une manière ou d’une autre, on peux lui faire des reproches sur des détails, chercher la bagarre, ne pas être d’accord à priori avec lui/elle... C’est assez difficile de ne pas se laisser entraîner à détruire quelque chose, une relation, un amour, ou tout autre chose lorsqu’on est en grand déséquilibre... :|

Ca peut prendre des formes violentes, certains rendent « coupable » des objets, s’énervent sur des « trucs » qu’ils arrivent pas à faire, sur leur ordinateur :) , ou moins drôle certains forment des groupes partageant les mêmes « caractéristiques » accusant dans la haine et l’agressivité d’autres personnes « différentes » d’être responsables :| … La chanson dit qu’il faut « bien mettre la haine quelque part » mais je ne suis pas tellement d’accord, « la haine » est loin d’être la seule « solution » pour « vivre de la peine ».. heureusement…

Chez les Bonobos, des singes très proches de nous, il y a quelque chose de semblable (sous forme de caricature) :

l’organisation sociale des bonobos en captivité présente une particularité. La paix du groupe est également maintenue par l’existence d’un bouc émissaire (ou pharmakos). Lorsqu’un groupe de chercheurs a retiré un bonobo blessé et frappé par les autres membres du groupe, une accentuation de la violence et une baisse de la sexualité ont pu être remarquées. A contrario, lorsque ce dernier fut ré-intégré au groupe, la paix du groupe fut ré-instaurée.

Il ne faut pas trop s’en vouloir car c’est une réaction « primitive » de chercher un coupable, c’est « automatique », instinctif et très difficile à contrôler. Même moi, si d’aventure je me trouve en grand déséquilibre (ce qui est plutôt rare de nos jours), moi qui suis pourtant bien au courant qu’il n’y a rien à faire que de « ressentir » cette peine « pressante », et d’attendre que ça passe, il m’arrive d’avoir du mal à me raisonner, et je me surprend parfois à chercher parmi d’innocentes raisons, un « responsable » de mon « mauvais » état (ça m’énerve ça d’ailleurs GRRR qu’est ce que ça peut m’énerver :evil: !!!! :D ;) )

La meilleure preuve qu’on à accusé un « faux coupable » c’est de se rendre compte une fois la peine passé qu’on s’en moque complètement ! Je me rappelle de cette copine qui après une soirée très joyeuse avec des amis s’était mise en tête sans vraie raison (le conducteur n’avait pas bu) de s’angoisser sincèrement pour eux, imaginant les pires scénarios sur la route, une véritable « peine » qui avait durée un bon moment ! Mais le lendemain.. plus rien ! :) elle n’a même pas téléphoné pour savoir s’il y avait eu un problème finalement, elle supposait tout à coup que ça s’était probablement bien passé ;) (ce qui était le cas..)

Mais les faux coupables les plus classiques reste dans le couple, et comme le dit Bedos « Le vrai plaisir de la dispute, c’est la réconciliation » ! :D ;)

On serait beaucoup plus objectif pour identifier les « vrais problèmes » et leurs trouver des solutions « correctes » à un moment où on se sent bien. Mais.. à « ce » moment, on a pas trop envie d’y penser ;)

 
 
 

Find a culprit !

Sometime we have good reasons to feel good or bad and we can say that it is because of something that has just happened to us, bad or good news, the simple fact of being Monday morning for Example or simply the weather outside, sunny and rainy. But there are other times where it’s much less obvious.. even not clear at all :s

Generally when we feel good without having any identifiable reason it’s not a problem to us, we just say that life is beautiful, and we take advantage of it ! On the other hand, when we feels bad without having any « obvious » reason, we tends to look for the cause. Indeed we are convinced that our state is the direct result of « something », even if it is unconscious, and of course we think that by « finding » this « thing » we can solve the « problem » and improve our state, stop feeling bad, our ultimate priority in these moments.

But sometimes it’s not easy to find something ! Not easy at all ! Simply because there is NO reason, we are just in imbalance and our bodies/spirit compensates softly, or brutally if the imbalance is too big… But anyway we seeking for a responsible, inside us by introspection, and outside in the world, or both, we suspect, it’s like an investigation… We need to find a culprit !.. absolutely… To have a chance to feel better. It must also be a decent « candidate », we can’t accuse the silent neighbor that we never sees.. whatever.. if he or she has an identifiable « difference », some will not hesitate :(

If we lives with someone we can easily fall into the trap of making him/her responsible in one way or another, we can make some reproach on details, seek the quarrel, disagree with him/her on everything… It is difficult not to be led to destroy something, a relationship, a love, or any other thing when you are in great imbalance …

It can take violent forms, some focus on objects, get upset on things they don’t succeed, on their computer :), or less funny some put themselves in a group to discriminate another one weaker and accuse it in hatred and aggression to be responsible… A French song says that we must « put hatred somewhere » but I do not agree, « hate » is far from being the only « way » to « flow out » the « feel bad ».. fortunately.

Among the Bonobos, monkeys very close to us, there is something similar (it almost look like our caricature) :

The social organization of bonobos in captivity has a peculiarity. The peace of the group is also maintained by the existence of a scapegoat (or pharmakos). When a group of researchers removed a bonobo injured and struck by the other members of the group, an increase in violence and a decrease in sexuality could be noticed. Conversely, when it was re-integrated into the group, the group’s peace was re-established.

We should not blame our-self too much because it is an « instinctive » reaction to look for a culprit, it is « automatic », primitive, and very difficult to control. Even I, if I get in a great imbalance (which is kind of rare these days), even if I’m very aware that there is nothing to do but to « feel » this pressing « sorrow » and to wait for it to pass, I sometimes find it difficult to reason me, and I sometimes find myself searching among innocent reasons a « responsible » for my « bad » state (it’s so silly, it really annoys me !)

The best proof that a « false guilty thing » has been accused is to realize once the « sorrow » has « passed » that we do not care anymore ! I remember this friend who after a very happy evening party, deeply worried a lot for some friends who just leaved by car (the driver was not drunk), she was imagining the worst scenarios on the road, she was feeling a real « anxiety » and for quite a long time! But the next day… nothing left ! :) She did not even phone to find out if there had a problem, finally she suddenly assumed that everything was all right for them ;) (which was the case ..)

The most classic « false reason » remains in the couple, it is even one of the preconditions in the formation of the couple : to agree on false reasons of argue! A very jealous person will not be able to pair with someone who can not stand jealousy, it’s so obviously that it’s almost silly to say it… A person who becomes violent when he/she is in great imbalance, when he/she has an urgent need for strong « sadness« , will be able to put himself in a couple only with someone who « accepts », or « endures » rather, that :( Whether it is a man or a woman, because men are rather physically violent but there are many women equally extremely violent in their words…

In short, it would be much more objective and it would be much more constructive to identify the « real problems » and find some « good » solutions to them at a time when one would feel good. But.. at this time, we do not want to think about it, at this moment we find that life is beautiful ! ;)