The
problem of gravity propagation has been subject of discussion for quite
a long time: Newton, Laplace and, in relatively more modern times,
Eddington pointed out that, if gravity propagated with finite velocity,
planets motion around the sun would become unstable due to a torque
originating from time lag of the gravitational interactions.
Such
an odd behavior can be found also in electromagnetism, when one
computes the propagation of the electric fields generated by a set of
uniformly moving charges. As a matter of fact the Li\'enard-Weichert
retarded potential leads to a formula indistinguishable from the one
obtained assuming that the electric field propagates with infinite
velocity.
If
you study Special or General Relativity you will soon encounter the
"relativistic correction factor", gamma, which is usually given as:
The velocity term, v, is the
conventional speed of the object in motion and c is the speed of light.
Gamma itself is just a dimensionless (pure) number. As per the formula,
g is
approximately 1 at ordinary terrestrial speeds. At speeds 99.9% of
light, g becomes
about 22. It is a correction factor, not something that stands alone,
and applies to speeds in space. It is used to compute
relativistic momentum, relativistic energy, length contraction and time
dilation at high speeds.
Physics textbooks have all sorts of examples about how and
why it is used. Here is one concerning muons:
Both the length
contraction and time dilation are easy to observe for objects moving at
velocities whose magnitudes are an appreciable fraction of that of
light. A particularly convincing example is found in the behavior of
particles called muons. These are known to be formed at an elevation of
around 10,000 m, near the top of the atmosphere, as a byproduct of
collisions of rapidly moving cosmic rays with the molecular
constituents of the atmosphere. The muons are projected toward the
surface of the earth at velocities of about 0.999c.
They are unstable particles; on the average each lives for 2.2 x 10-6
sec, as measured in a reference frame in which the muons are
stationary, before decaying into other particles. Now a particle moving
at essentially 3.0 x 108 m/sec for 2.2 x 10-6
sec will travel only 660 m. Hence it might seem that all muons would
have decayed long before they are able to reach the ground, since they
must travel around 10,000 m to do so. But, in fact, observations show
that nearly all the muons formed at the top of the atmosphere reach
ground level.
Time dilation
explains the observations. A prediction as to whether or not a muon can
traverse the thickness of the atmosphere before it decays should not
use 2.2 x 10-6 sec for the time available. This
value is the proper time the particles live, on the average, because it
is measured in a reference frame in which they are at rest. Instead,
the corresponding dilated time should be used since the observations
are made in a reference frame in which the muons are moving at a very
high velocity. For v/c =
0.999, the time dilation factor has the value 
= 
= 1/0.045 =
22. Hence the dilated lifetime has the value 22 x 2.2 x 10-6
sec = 4.9 x 10-5 sec. A particle moving at 3.0 x
108 m/sec for this time will travel a distance
of 14,000 m, more than enough to reach ground level before decaying. —Quantum Physics of Atoms, Molecules,
Solids, Nuclei, and Particles, R. Eisberg, R. Resnick,
Second Edition, 1985, p. A-9
Relativity can even predict the actual numbers of muons
expected at sea level, not just the expectation that most will arrive
there:
It
is easy to distinguish experimentally between the classical and
relativistic predictions for the number of muons detected at sea
level. Suppose that we observe with a muon detector 108 muons in some time
interval at an altitude of 9000 m. How many would we expect
to observe at sea level in the same time interval? According to the
nonrelativistic prediction, the time taken for these muons to travel
9000 m is (9000 m)/0.998c »
30 msec,
which is 15 lifetimes.
Inserting N0 = 108 and t
= 15T into Equation 1-0 [N(t) = N0e-t/T], we obtain
N = 108e-15
= 30.6
We
would thus expect all but about 31 of the original 100 million muons to
decay before reaching sea level.
According
to the relativistic prediction, the earth must travel only the
contracted distance of 600 m in the rest frame of the muon. This takes
only 2 msec = T. Thus the
number expected at sea level is
N = 108e-1
= 3.68 x 107
Relativity
predicts that we should observe 36.8 million muons. Experiments of this
type have confirmed the relativistic predictions. —Modern
Physics,
Paul Tipler, 1978, p. 13
(An alternative interpretation is that time progression
remains completely uniform, and that motion affects the decay
"constant".)
Modern physics does not clearly explain why the Universe
acts this way. Consequently, gamma becomes a type
of sophisticated "fudge factor" that is used in the equations to make
the answers agree with experiment. Hopefully we can educate our
intuition by seeking some additional insights into what the gamma
equation is trying to tell us.
With some elementary math, we can rearrange it into a
different form:
1-v2/c2
= 1/g2
1 = 1/g2
+ v2/c2
c2
= c2/g2
+ v2
The last equation
with the sum of squares suggests a Pythagorean relationship or a
"Euclidean distance" relationship with the speed of light. The
relationship could also be written in terms of orthogonal functions
(sine and cosine, complex numbers, vectors, etc.). My own term for this
kind of math is "orthogonal sum".
A
slide from my presentation "The
Quest for the Stardrive"
Gamma applies only to speeds in space. However,
motion at speeds comparable to that of light involve temporal speeds
(motion in three-dimensional time) as well as spatial speeds
(motion in three-dimensional space). If we want to combine a temporal
speed with a spatial speed, we have to use an orthogonal sum—exactly
what this equation is using. Hence, we could replace the c2/g2 term with a term that
represents a temporal speed, which when stated in terms of our spatial
reference system would be an inverse speed. When written in s/t
dimensions, such an equation would look like the following:
(s/t)2
[=] (1/(t/s))2
+ (s/t)2
The [=] means that only the dimensions are being
considered, not numeric magnitudes.
These
two forms of the gamma equation tell us:
- A
gravitational reference system, be it a planet, a spacecraft, or an
atom, always moves at the speed of light. In fact, everything moves at
the speed of light.
- The
complete speed relative to such a system actually has two orthogonal
components: a temporal speed and a spatial speed. When the spatial
speed is zero (v=0), the speed of the system is
entirely in time. Time flows, but space "stays put" or "is stationary".
On the other hand, if the system is moving at the (spatial) speed of
light (v=c), then
space flows, and time "stays put" or "stops".
In
this interpretation, we can immediately see the reason for time
dilation at speeds comparable to that of light. At c, the phenomena
remains in the same time unit and does not experience the flow of time.
At speed c, clocks would have an indefinitely long tick. Unstable
particles would have indefinitely long life-times. At speeds slightly
less than light, time flows a little bit, but not nearly as fast as we
normally experience it. The muons in the example above have their
lifetimes stretched out by a slow passage through the time units.
I prefer to illustrate the relationship of the two speeds
with this kind of diagram:
2-17-14
Note: A review of this
diagram suggests there is a problem with the last sentence in the
next-to-last paragraph. The speed s/t = 1/Ą from
a standpoint of a gravitational reference system is zero speed in
space, c speed in time (ordinary "local physics"). At the speed of
light, which is actually intermediate on the speed spectrum
from our standpoint, the speed would be c speed in space, and c speed
in time (which reduces to 1/1). At the other extreme is zero speed in
time, and infinite speed in space ( s/t = Ą /1
) which is instantaneous action-at-a-distance from our gravitational
observational standpoint (fully "non-local physics").
In the true physical
situation the "natural" or real "zero" is c (or 1/1) and spatial and
temporal speeds are displacements away from the origin. The math is
similar to the familiar r = r sine(q)
+ r cosine(q)
of high school trigonometry where r=1. But trying
to explain this from the perspective of a gravitational reference
system, and using separate space and time dimensions, instead
of "motional dimensions" introduces some conceptual
difficulties with the math.
And so I don't know
if this note clarifies or only adds to the confusion. Pythagoras
encountered a similar problem, and my comments on
that might be helpful. See also Gravitational
motion has multiple dimensions
3-9-14
Note: Here is more food for thought on
the c2
= c2/g2
+ v2
equation. I apparently have had a blind spot regarding the "units" in
this equation. The left side can be time/space or space/time. These are
identical at the speed of light and so it does not matter which is
used.
As
for the right side, the least strained interpretation is that the first
term is truly a temporal speed and the second is truly a spatial speed.
In physics terms a "non-local speed" is being combined with a "local
speed". The first is more like energy and the second is, of course, a
velocity.
My
blind spot appears to be that an "orthogonal sum" can not only sum
independent things, but
things of a completely different character as
well.
Consider
these examples. The Pythagorean Theorem sums independent x and y
lengths, but the sum (the hypotenuse) is still a length. In physics
class we would add x
and y velocities, but the result was still a velocity. Or we could
combine various weights of red, green, and blue independent color
dimensions, but the result was still color. But this trait of
"independence with sameness" is not really necessary.
In
familiar terms, we could add (combine) 3 pounds of carrots and 4 pounds
of potatoes in a pot of water. The resultant is neither carrots nor
potatoes, but is something else that includes the character of both. In
this case we can call it “soup” , or more specifically a “soup taste
vector”. The length of 5 shows how much of this specific soup taste we
have to distribute.
Similarly we could
add old refrigerators, junked cars, rotting garbage, dirt etc. and call
it a “landfill vector”. We could even devise a vector “inner product
space” and take dot products of the "landfill state vector" with a unit
vector representing a particular component, to find out how much stuff
of a particular kind we have in the landfill (something that might
interest the EPA, for instance). Such methods are well known to
mathematicians and quantum physicists.
Hence, there is no
need to force the units on the right side of the equation to agree in
character, as long the concept of Euclidean distance still
makes sense (it would not make sense, say, in a
pressure-temperature-volume diagram). But what is needed is an
adjustment in magnitude for the temporal term as seen from a spatial
reference system. Hence, gamma ( g)
needs no units and can still be a pure number.
6-8-14
Sooner or later I will get this right. I now think all the terms have
the dimensions of space/time (ordinary velocity) and that gamma can
remain dimensionless (a pure number). The units really have
to be
the same to preserve the concept
of Euclidean distance.
In the soup example, the dimensions are NOT potatoes or
carrots, but pounds.
In the landfill, the dimensions could be tons or cubic yards but NOT
refrigerators, cars, etc. The gamma term simply changes the
magnitude of a temporal motion into the magnitude that would be seen in
a spatial reference system as an ordinary spatial velocity.
6-23-16
Another twist on the "summation" concept comes from vector
and Geometric Algebra:
"How can
we add, e.g., a scalar and a vector? Are we not adding apples and
oranges? Yes, but there is a sense in which we can
add apples and oranges: put them together in a bag . . . .
The
apples and oranges retain their separate identities, but there are
"apples + oranges" in the bag. (Linear and Geometric Algebra,
Alan MacDonald (2010) p. 81 )
This
is the sense that a quaternion is the "sum" of a scalar and a vector,
or a complex number is the sum of a real part and an imaginary part.
In Geometric Algebra "the
vector space G3
consists of objects of the form M = s + v + B + T, where s is a scalar, v is a vector, B is a bivector, and T is a trivector."
Each part retains its own identity and can be
"summed"
(in the usual sense of the word) only with another part of like kind in
a different object. But the object itself may be the "sum" of distinctly different parts in the sense of being in the
same bag.
To
get a better intuitive feel for this, consider this rather contrived
illustration. Imagine you are on a boat in a river with some
extraordinarily ignorant boatmen. The boatmen do not know what a river
is. The river you are on is, to them, a long lake. When the
boat is rowed out to a spot in the middle of the long lake, the "magic
wood" in the boat's hull makes the land flow by. You point out that the
land seems to move because the boat is in a river of moving water and
is being carried along by the motion of the water, and that is why the
land seems to flow by. But the boatmen are unconvinced. They are on a
lake, and the lake water is stationary. They throw a cork overboard and
say "See, the cork stays exactly in the same place as the boat, exactly
as it does on land, where we did the same test. We are not moving. It
is the land that moves, not us."
Later,
you discover that the boat has a motor. And so you propose an
experiment. You drive the boat upstream with the motor on. The boatmen
remark that "The land has stopped flowing, but now the water moves."
They throw another cork overboard, and it rapidly moves away. They seem
disappointed that you do not believe in the powers of the "magic wood"
in the boat's hull. It is as though you have cheated by using the motor.
One
thing you realize in this situation, is that no matter what you do, the
boat is always moving. If you turn off the motor, the boat moves with
respect to the land. If you drive upstream with the motor on, the boat
moves with respect to the water. At intermediate speeds, you are moving
with respect to both land and water. If you
wrote physics equations to describe the situation, you would
always have an extra "speed factor" popping up in the equations
somewhere.
And that is how things are in a
gravitationally bound reference system. Space stays put, but time flows
past us. But if we get into a spaceship and move at the speed of light,
we find that space flows past us, but time becomes
stationary. No matter what we do, something is still moving!
And a speed factor, c, keeps showing up in fundamental physics
equations like E=mc2, E=pc, and E=cB. If we try to
measure the relationship between a magnetic field and and electric
field, we find that different observers with different speeds, will see
different magnitudes of the magnetic and electric components (see the example in the Motion
Cancellers article below). And unlike the situation with the boat where
the speeds are purely spatial and of the same basic nature, the speed
of an object in the context of a gravitational system is a combination
of two speeds of a dissimilar nature. And so the total speed
has to be computed by orthogonal addition of the two terms. This means
that they are inextricably intertwined with each other, and that our
simple concepts of space and time must be augmented with some really
obnoxious "relativistic" relationships.
At ordinary everyday speeds these complex relationships can
be ignored. But they are still present, and can be detected with
high-precision instruments, even at low speeds. An experiment with
ultra precise atomic clocks flown on commercial airline flights in 1971
demonstrated the kinematic time shift (Special Relativity)
and the gravitational time shift (General Relativity). And lately there
have also been hints of the Lense-Thirring "frame drag"
caused by rotation of a gravitational body like the Earth.
The Tajmar effect from Quantised
Inertia", M.E. McCulloch (June 17, 2011)
"It has been found
experimentally by [1-3] that when rings of niobium, aluminium,
stainless steel and other materials are cooled to 5K and spun, then
accelerometers and laser gyroscopes, not in frictional contact, show a
small unexplained acceleration in the same direction as the ring, with
a size 3 +/- 1.2 x 10-8 times the acceleration
of the ring for clockwise rotations, and about half that value for
anticlockwise ones. This is called the Tajmar effect and is similar to
the Lense-Thirring effect (frame-dragging) predicted by General
Relativity, but is 20 orders of magnitude larger and shows the added
parity violation. The effect has not yet been reproduced in another
laboratory." http://arxiv.org/pdf/1106.3266.pdf
"Guidelines to Antigravity", Robert L. Forward, American Journal of Physics,
Vol. 31, No. 3, 166-170, March, 1963 (Received 12 September 1962)
http://www.academia.edu/3336384/Antigravity_-_by_Robert_L.Forward
"EINSTEIN'S
general theory of relativity provides a number of ways to generate
non-Newtonian gravitational forces. Theoretically, all of these forces
could be used to counteract the gravitational field of the earth, thus
acting as a form of antigravity. The three outlined here were probably
known by Einstein before he published his paper on the principle of
general relativity in 1916. They were first specifically derived by
Thirring in 1918, and since then have been contained in nearly every
text on general relativity.
The equations of general relativity
not only predict the usual radial Newtonian gravitational force
behavior of a stationary mass on a stationary test body, but they also
predict that a moving mass can create forces on a test body which are
similar to the usual centrifugal and Coriolis forces, although much
smaller. In addition, when the general relativity field equations are
linearized, they result in a set of dynamic gravitational field
relations similar to the Maxwell relations.Thus one can use intuitive
pictures from electromagnetic theory to design theoretical models.
Whether the effects predicted by the linearized theory really exist,
will, of course, have to be checked by repeating the calculations with
the nonlinearized field equations."
Three cases are covered:
1.
A massive rotating ring with a test body below it and centered on the
rotation axis. The result: "the rotating mass not only forces
the
test body away from the axis in an imitation of centrifugal force, but
also pulls it upward into the plane of rotation"
2. A rotating massive spherical shell, with a test body moving inside
the shell.
3.
A large accelerated mass near a small test body. It is found that the
accelerated body drags the test body along with it. "In
addition
to the usual Newtonian attraction, the test body experiences forces in
the direction of the acceleration and the velocity of the large body .
. . "
Update
5-19-2003:
Buried in this interpretation somewhere is a suggestion that
gravitation is necessarily non-directional. Our planet is "moving
through time" or "time is passing by us". In other words, our Earth is
moving relative to time. The real motion must be some dimensional
version of a t/s ratio (three-dimensional time per unit of clock
space). Temporal motion, however, has no direction in space. The
gravitational motion can therefore have a signed magnitude, but
vectorial direction is fundamentally meaningless here. It
follows that gravity must necessarily have the 1/r2
or "inverse square" force (motion) distribution explained earlier.
Other inverse square forces will likely have an analogous structure (t3/s3
for mass, t2/s2
for magnetic "charge", t1/s1
for electric charge). Also implied is: 1.) the
motion of a spacecraft within the spatial system can make the passage
of time seem to slow down to zero, but cannot make time speed up, and
2.) the fundamental motion of a spacecraft will always oppose
gravitational motion; it must be "towards c" and not "away from c and
towards more gravity". See
also: http://fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-files/Fraser_NatureOfTime.pdf
; "Luxon Hypothesis" http://www.tardyon.de/other.htm
Update 2-9-2015a
I
need to comment on the practical implications of this interpretation
of gamma. Here is what I see:
1.
Mass does not increase with increasing speed. Instead, a
directly measureable spatial motion is converted to a non-directly
measureable
temporal motion. Temporal motion (t/s) is the inverted form of spatial
motion
(s/t). At speeds less than that of light, the spatial motion
predominates. At
"speeds" above that of light, all space and time relationships invert
(from our perspective), and the temporal motion predominates.
(Temporal motion is equivalent to what physicists call
"non-local" motion; spatial motion is called "local" motion.
The
former is non-directional in a spatial reference system, and has only a
magnitude, like energy; the latter is ordinary velocity)
2.
Energy is a better measure of the "amount of
motion" at relativistic speed than spatial velocity.
The natural, fundamental pattern for speed
is c, the speed of light, and its inverse is 1/c, which has the
dimensions of
energy. This explains the behavior of particles in a particle
accelerator. An
electron with a speed of 0.995 that of
light, has an energy of about 15MeV.
At
a speed of 0.99999995 that of light, it has an energy of 5GeV. Note
that the
speed has increased by a factor of only 1.0005 but the energy has
increased by
a factor of 300. How can there be such a huge increase in energy with
only a
tiny (5 parts in ten thousand) speed increase? It is because the
measure of the
"amount of motion", speed, is misaligned with the problem.
The
"amount of motion"
instead goes mostly into the t/s term (energy). (In a more
normal
circumstance the non-directional momentum would be seen as "thermal
motion".)
3.
If "temporal speeds" are
technologically
accessible, we could develop a completely new kind of space propulsion
system
that is not based on the production of ordinary velocity. It would have
to be a
"field propulsion" technology based on the non-local characteristics
of electric, magnetic, and gravitational fields. It would be capable of
non-local motion: an object could go from "here" to "there"
without traversing the intervening space (that is, it has no
trajectory. An
object would appear, then disappear, then reappear somewhere else).
Ordinary spatial motion is also possible. And it seems
possible
that the two could mix, depending on how the type and dimensions of the
momentum map into our reference system; spatial dimensions could
overlap, and an object could appear to be semi-transparent, seemingly
"materializing" out of thin air, and even occupying the same space with
something else. Such an object
may also manifest side-effects of powerful electric and magnetic
fields.
Such
a propulsion system would NOT have a Newtonian
reaction, like a rocket ship. The reaction
in such a system would be radial and
symmetric and cancel itself out. The reaction is like the Poynting
vectors in a
charging capacitor of cylindrical construction. The vectors point
radially inward and cancel
out to yield no net momentum (unless the capacitor is asymmetric). The action
itself is perpendicular to the plane formed by the reaction vectors.
That means
a spacecraft could be entirely self-contained and "bootstrap" itself
(and its occupants) to high spatial velocities or even non-local
motion. It would be like a railgun
accelerating itself with no recoil. The structure of the ship, however,
must be
strong enough to withstand the radial reaction. (Newtonian
reaction forces are conceptualized as "equal and opposite".
Electromagnetic reaction forces can be
conceptualized
as "equal but orthogonal". Think "dimension",
not "direction".)
Special
and General Relativity and the gamma correction factor work fine for
reference system effects. But remember that these theories are "local"
by intention and design. They assume causality in space, that all
speeds must be spatial, and that speeds must be less than c. They are out of
scope when applied to "non-local" phenomena. See the article
below: In
Search of
the Geometry of Space, Time, and Motion and "Beyond Einstein: non-local physics".
"Call to
me and I will answer you and tell you great and unsearchable things you
do not know." —Jeremiah 33:3, NIV
html 2/03
Problems with time
Our
view of motion affects our view of time. In physics, time is generally
treated as a parameter, not as a variable. Action occurs "in space",
not "in time" Time is used as a descriptor
not a participator. Time is "external" to the
motion. Because of this, physicists have proposed eliminating the
concept of time as being fundamental. Consider Amrit S. Sorli's paper,
"Time is Derived from Motion through Timeless Space":
"A growing number of modern
researchers are challenging the view that space-time is the fundamental
arena of the universe. They point out that it does not correspond to
physical reality, and propose “timeless space” as the arena instead. .
. . Time and clocks are man-made inventions. Motion is primary, time is
secondary. Time is an artifice of measurement, a useful tool that
permits us to build mental and mathematical models for our daily lives
as well as for our physics and cosmology. But time as a fundamental
entity has no role in physics.
[Conclusion] When physical objects
move, they move through space, not through space-time, and not through
time. Time is derived from this motion through space, and space itself
is timeless. Whilst the speed of light is considered to be a maximum
rate of motion, this varies with the local environment, the photon is
an extended entity that experiences no time, and some atomic-scale
physical phenomena appear to be timeless. Clocks are macroscopic
measuring devices which accumulate local internal motion, and we can
record a sequencing of that motion and the changes that occur in space.
But we can find no evidence to support the existence of space-time as a
fundamental entity. Accordingly we must conclude that we live in a
timeless atemporal universe of space and motion, where the past and
future only exist in the human mind, and the only eternity is
now." ("Time is derived from motion through
timeless space", Amrit S. Sorli,
http://www.fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/TIME_IS_DERIVED_FROM_MOTION.pdf
)
And this from Carlo
Rovelli's paper “Forget time” (2008):
"Following a line of research that I have developed
for several years, I argue that the best strategy for understanding
quantum gravity is to build a picture of the physical world where the
notion of time plays no role at all. I summarize here this point of
view, explaining why I think that in a fundamental description of
nature we must “forget time”, and how this can be done in the classical
and in the quantum theory. The idea is to develop a formalism that
treats dependent and independent variables on the same footing. In
short, I propose to interpret mechanics as a theory of relations
between variables, rather than the theory of the evolution of variables
in time. " ("Forget Time", Carlo Rovelli, 2008, http://www.fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-files/Rovelli_Time.pdf
)
And
this from "The Nature of Time" by Julian Barbour
"I
will not claim that time can definitely be banished from physics . . .
. Nevertheless, I think it is entirely possible—indeed
likely—that time as such plays no role in the
universe." ("The Nature of Time", Julian Barbour http://www.fqxi.org/data/essay-contest-files/Barbour_The_Nature_of_Time.pdf
And this from "
'Space Travel is Utter Bilge' ", a quote from astronomer Sir
Richard Wooley in 1956, used as the title of an article by Donald
Yeomans (2002), a JPL senior research scientist wherein he states:
"We must
re-examine the physical properties of space itself if we are to
understand the relation between electromagnetic and gravitational
forces. We must also re-examine our concept of time. It is possible
that time is more than one-dimensional." http://greyfalcon.us/restored/Secrets%20of%20the%20Saucer%20Scientists.htm
And this from "Physical
Principles of Advanced Space Propulsion Based on Heims's Field Theory",
Walter Dröscher, Jochem Häuser (2002) http://www.hpcc-space.com/publications/documents/PrinciplesOfAdvancedSpacePropulsionAIAA-paper-2002-4094.pdf
"In
this context, space and time are not the container for things, but are,
due to their dynamic (cyclic) nature, the things themselves. This is an
entirely different physical picture from the approach of simply adding
the stress-energy-momentum tensor of the electromagnetic field to the
right-hand side of Einstein's field equations . . "
For
additional articles about time see: http://www.fqxi.org/community/essay/winners/2008.1
And http://milesmathis.com/time.html
Problems
with "space"
Similar
arguments could just as validly be applied to space. We might need to
"forget space" too, at least as a fundamental
concept. I have asserted that the quantum mechanical world is a world
that is limited to one unit of space. There is no "inside" to this
space. It is non-metrizable. We therefore cannot specify
trajectories or velocities in the quantum world. The "happenings" are
in three-dimensional time, not space. Only a non-local (and therefore
non-directional and probabilistic) description can be given.
Clearly,
a choice of metric will be affected by quantization
boundaries: phenomena that involve one unit of space, one
unit of time, or one unit of their ratio (space/time or time/space) may
appear/behave/measure in a strangely non-intuitive manner from the view
point of humans who are accustomed to a reference system that is quite
"distant" :-) from
these boundaries. According to current views in physics, the photon,
for example, experiences no time flow at all. Now it is appropriate to
ask, Does it even experience space flow? Like
a leaf in a river, it might be stationary with respect to
what is really moving.
A
choice of a distance metric also affects interatomic distance
measurements, and we know something weird is going on with that. When
certain salts are melted, the volume of the melt increases compared to
the volume of the unmelted solid. This would lead us to expect that the
interatomic distances in the melt would increase slightly. But in fact
the distance decreases:
"There is
another important fact about the melting process. When many ion
lattices are melted, there is a 10 to 25% increase in the
volume of the system (Table 5.10). This volume increase is
of fundamental importance to someone who wishes to conceptualize models
for ionic liquids because one is faced with an apparent contradiction.
From the increase in volume, one would think that the mean distance
apart of the ions in a liquid electrolyte would be greater than in its
parent crystal. On the other hand, from the fact that the ions in a
fused salt are slightly closer together than in the solid lattice, one
would think that there should be a small volume decrease upon fusion.
How is this emptiness—which
evidently gets introduced into the solid lattice on melting—to
be conceptualized?" (Modern Electrochemistry: ionics,
John O'M.Bockris, Amulya K. N. Reddy, 2nd ed, 1998, p.
611-612)
"Such "volumes of
nothingness" must be present to account for the large increase in
volume upon fusion while at the same time the internuclear distance
decreases (see Tables 5.9 and 5.10)" (Bockris, ibid.,
p. 619)
". . . this space is
counterintuitive to the internulcear distances given by X-ray or
neutron diffraction. The internuclear distances found in molten salts
are smaller, not bigger, as might be thought from the increase in
volume." (Bockris, ibid., p. 620)
(For
more on this see Melted
volume increases, but internuclear distance decreases. Why?
and Natural
Quantities . . . )
Still
more trouble with the interatomic distance metric is suggested by the
ultra high density of matter inside white dwarf stars:
"the average density of
matter in a white dwarf must therefore be, very roughly, 1,000,000
times greater than the average density of the Sun, or approximately 106
grams
(1 tonne)
per cubic
centimeter.[1]
" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf
)
Scientists
try to explain this fantastically high density with very contrived
"explanations" like "electron degenerate matter" and "neutron stars".
But again the whole problem may result from some misconceptions about
the appropriate metric for interatomic distance. It is important for us
to understand what is going on here, and it has implications for space
travel.
The
density of matter in a white dwarf is greater than that of ordinary
water by a factor of 106. In a
so-called neutron star it is 1014.
What if "space" could, by technical means, be shortened somehow by a
factor of 1014? The Andromeda galaxy
is approximately 2 x 106 light years from Earth.
If by artificial means we would "shrink" the distance by a factor of 1014,
then Andromeda would only be 10-8 light years
distant. That is about 0.3 light seconds—closer
than the Moon is to Earth. Distances in the universe would become
trivial from a space travel standpoint. That may seem far-fetched and
hard to visualize. But if motion is the real
metric, as suggested above, our concepts of what we call space or time
are quite artificial. Motion is a ratio between space and
time (s/t). Suppose we could somehow put more time
between atoms. That would decrease the effect of the spatial unit,
seemingly shrinking it. Ultrahigh density matter could be made in the
laboratory. Nature does it somehow. Why can't we do the same? And if we
could do it in the laboratory, why not in open space? The "inverseness"
of the space/time relationship in motion implies
that spatially distant objects might be close temporally.
Related:
Is it possible to have an "inverted star"? That
is, a star
where the heavy elements "ungravitate" to the surface and the lighter
elements gravitate to the core? Here is a note from Science News
"Odd white dwarf offers peek at core", Christopher
Crockett (April 30, 2016,) p. 12-13:
White
dwarfs . . . are the last place astronomers expected to find a nearly
pure oxygen atmosphere. . . . a newly discovered white dwarf . . . has
no hydrogen or helium at its surface. Its atmosphere is dominated by
oxygen. . . . While oxygen dominates this white dwarf's atmosphere,
neon and magnesium come in second and third . . . . In 2007, Dufour and
colleagues reported a similar strange sighting: several white dwarfs
whose atmospheres were loaded with carbon instead of hydrogen and
helium. . . . "This white dwarf might only be a freak. . . . Although
often in science, it's the exception that makes you understand a great
deal later on."
And
there are other astronomical objects that suggest problems with the
distance metric. But instead of space between atoms, the problem is
space between stars. One example pertains to 'ultra-compact dwarf
galaxies' :
"UCDs were discovered in 1999. Although they
are still enormous by everyday standards, at about 60 light years
across, they are less than 1/1000th the diameter of our own Galaxy, the
Milky Way." http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090212093900.htm
Another
pertains to the internal structure of quasars:
"Some quasars display
changes in luminosity
which are rapid in the optical range and even more rapid in the X-rays.
Because these changes occur very rapidly they define an upper limit on
the volume of a quasar; quasars are not much larger than the Solar System.[4]
This implies an astonishingly high energy
density." ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasar
)
Quasars
are apparently super-compact galaxies. They seem to be an extreme
example of the UCDs.
Another
conundrum is that quasars, thought to be the most distant
objects in the universe, are associated with nearby galaxies:
"The apparent distance of
quasars may be illusionary, and they could be nearby. In fact, a good
deal of evidence demonstrates that redshifts cannot be trusted as
indicators of distance when it comes to quasars." http://www.livingcosmos.com/quasar.htm
Apparently,
large galaxies can eject compact objects that expand. Those "knots" in
the M87 jets could each be a highly 'compressed' collection of stars
that eventually expand back out into small galaxies after ejection:
"To the
unconventional astronomer, especially to Halton Arp, who has been the
primary collector of these discrepant observations, it looks as if the
primary galaxy is ejecting "babies" that grow up into companion
galaxies." http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050106universe-arp.htm
 | | Why a narrow jet?
An
energetic process like an explosion will scatter explosion products
outwards and spherically. We would not expect such an explosion to
produce a narrow jet light years in length. It maybe that these
jets are so energetic that the resulting motion involves
one temporal dimension and only two spatial dimensions. If we
could ride the beam, we would see "relativistic
aberration"--essentially a two-dimensional view of the Universe.
The spatial view from the side, however, would be one-dimensional,
like a line. See reference below.
"We're
now only one part in a thousand slower than light. Even objects five
degrees from our stern now enter the field of view looking in the
direction of travel. Extreme distortion of objects behind us becomes
apparent."
http://www.fourmilab.ch/cship/aberration.html |
The idea of compressed
structures expanding back out into normal density structures reminds me
of nova (novea) associated with white dwarf stars. As already noted
above, these stars are comprised of extremely dense material. Novea
could be a manifestation of a process that causes an ultradense star to
adjust its density back to normal. Exactly what is going on here is not
at all clear, but it probably involves a quantization boundary, which
in turn requires a "motional metric" (discussed
below) to be properly understood.
Following this line of
thought, there is even a several decades old theory that the Earth
itself is physically expanding:
"Global
Expansion Tectonics a More Rational Explanation",
James Maxlow http://tmgnow.com/repository/global/expanding_earth.html
"The
Expanding/Growing Earth", David Bressan (2011):
"A
much stranger idea to explain the
assumed phenomena was proposed by the German physicist Pascual Jordan
in 1966 - the increase of earth was imputable to the general dilatation
of the space-time continuum."
http://historyofgeology.fieldofscience.com/2011/01/expandinggrowing-earth.html
"In
1966, Jordan published the 182 page work Die
Expansion der Erde. Folgerungen aus der Diracschen Gravitationshypothese
(The expansion of the Earth. Conclusions from the Dirac gravitation
hypothesis)[4]
in which he developed his theory that, according to Paul
Dirac's hypothesis of a steady weakening of gravitation
throughout the history of the universe, the Earth may have swollen to
its current size, from an initial ball of a diameter of only about
7,000 kilometres (4,300 mi)." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascual_Jordan
"
An even stranger claim is
in a German patent by Karl Nowak (Verfahren
und Einrichtung zur AEnderung von Stoffeigenschaften oder Herstellung
von stark expansionsfaehigen Stoffen
. in English:
"Method
and arrangement to the Change of Material Characteristic or Manufacture
of Strongly Expansive-Capable Materials"), German No. 905 847
Class 12g, Group 101 (1943, published 1954; DE0905847C) ) Henery
Stevens offers these comments:
According
to Karl Nowak's 1954 German patent, patent number 905847, Class 12g,
Group 101, by a process of extreme cooling coupled with pressure, the
basic atomic structure of material can be changed. It is reduced,
narrowed and confined in terms of atomic, crystalline structure. . .
. Admittedlly, at first the idea of compression cooling as a
means to change atomic structure sounds a lot like junk science.
At this
point Dr. Gordon Freeman weighs in with some remarkable scientific
insight. According to Dr. Freeman, an elements [sic]
behavior is determined by its arrangement of electrons orbiting the
nucleus of that elemental atom. Seven electron shells are present
around the core. Under high pressure electrons are shifted to lower
orbits and new orbital overlappings are formed. This changes the whole
behavior of the element concerning color, boiling temperature, density,
and so forth.
The trick
seems to be to cool and compress the material and then gradually
release the pressure. The material will retain its new properties at
least for several months. (Hitler's Suppressed and
Still-Secret Weapons, Henry Stevens
(2007) p. 127; )
Such a claim is both hard
to believe and hard to ignore. Certainly there are strong suggestions
from several sources that we still have a lot to learn about
interatomic distance and related effects. (See
also "Scientists Fabricate Room Temperature
Superconducting Material" http://www.nextenergynews.com/news1/next-energy-news3.19a.html
)
Here
is another little tidbit to consider. Cryogenic processing of ferrous
metals is used to transform austenite into martensite even after the
usual heat tempering treatment:
Factually,
if you were to examine mass heat treated items like many available
drill bits, saw blades, etc., you would find many that show only 50% to
60% transformation. This is the area in which cryogenics can really
strut its stuff. The reason is that cryogenics is the only method known
that can complete the transformation to 99.8% to 100% martensite, or
come at all close to it. Martensite, as you recall is the fine hardened
grain structure that you strive for in the heat treat process. . . .
Deep
freezing of metals has been around for many years. It has been in use
for at least 30 to 35 years to stress relieve cast iron gears and
weldments. This is the reason you will find dry ice at a welding supply
store. Welders discovered many years ago that they could rely on dry
ice to stress relieve welds. . . . The Chinese . . . are now selling
end mills that have been cryogenically frozen.
Cryogenic
processing has also been used to reclaim "overcooked steel".
This
kind of steel has a high percentage of "retained austenite", which
greatly reduces hardenability. Its magnetic properties have
been
so severely altered, a magnetic chuck might not be able to hold it in
position for machining. This kind of steel may actually shrink
during heat treatment. The internal structure of
this metal
is so messed up that reheat treating the part usually does not remedy
the problem. However, it can usually be completely restored
by
cryogenic processing. ( Heat Treatment Selection, and
Application of Tool Steels, William E. Bryson, 2009, p.
107,114,170-171)
The
point here is that even in a metal soaked to liquid nitrogen
temperatures, there are still plenty of things happening. The metal may
look inert and inactive, but it is not.
These
are examples of instances where space itself seems to have 'shrunk', or
at least is not behaving in the way we expect it to.
Certainly it does not behave in the manner implied by a simple
Euclidean metric.
This is
totally
off the subject but I just could
not resist:
"Under the influence of the magnetic field,
the number of
internal defects decreases as a result of their self-elimination under
the action of the Lorentz force. These changes lead to a reduction in
the barriers to dislocation movement and thereby increase the material
plasticity." ("Hyperplasticity effect under magnetic pulse
straightening of dual phase steel", AP Falaleev, VV Meshkov, and A
Shymchenko IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and
Engineering 153
(2016) 012014 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/153/1/012014 )
This is something
like
annealing, but it does not use heat and is much faster. |
Relativity
"paradoxes"
This
probably reminds us of the Special Relativity "paradoxes" where one
dimension of an object seems to shrink in the dimension of its high
speed motion. However, this seems to be only a reference system effect,
not an actual physical effect (one that would result in high densities,
high temperatures, etc). As noted above (Sorli), there are strong
doubts that the Universe actually uses this particular metric (the
so-called "Minkowski space" ; and because of the ict
term, it is obviously non-Euclidean, in case anyone is wondering).
Examples
for Special Relativity effects are usually presented as something with
high speed motion as measured from a gravitational reference system
(Earth). In this situation there are
"relativistic effects" that have to be taken into account. But one
thing that I have never seen discussed in the literature is the
"distance" metric for two spacecraft both moving at speeds comparable
to light (relative to Earth). In view of the increasingly non-local
character of motion at high speeds, what is the "relative motion" or
"relative distance" applicable to just the spacecraft themselves? To
me, this is the essence of the claim of Relativity that "all motion is
relative". But that claim only seems to take into account the
characteristics of space (and time) as seen from an Earthlike
(gravitational) reference system. In other words, physicists would have
trouble with this question: "Two spaceships with identical, initially
synchronized clocks are moving at 50% of the speed of light. Which
spacecraft has the slow clock?" (See also "Herbert
Dingle Was Correct! Part VIII The Twins Paradox And Dingle’s
Apostasy From Orthodox Relativity" By Harry H. Ricker III http://www.gsjournal.net/old/science/ricker30.pdf
and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Dingle#Controversies
)
Here
is another one that probably appears in the literature
somewhere: Two identical twins of the same height walk away
from each other. Each sees the other as "shrinking in the distance".
Which twin does the real shrinking? Is this an
actual effect (a change in physical dimensions)? Or is it just a
reference system effect (a matter of appearances only) ? What happens
when the twins come back together?
Special
Relativity seems to have limited applicability (as the name implies).
Rotational motion, for instance, is generally regarded as absolute.
If I spin around in my chair once per second, I am rotating
relative to the rest of the Universe. Or is the Universe violently
whipping around me? Mathematically both pictures are equivalent, but
only one is physically realizable. I think it is clear that rotational
motion is indeed absolute. (See Sagnac
effect) Special Relativity cannot apply.
Says Feynman:
"There
is no "relativity of rotation." A rotating system is not an inertial
frame, and the laws of physics are different. We must be sure to use
equations of electromagnetism with respect to inertial coordinate
systems." ( The Feynman Lectures on Physics,
Richard P.
Feynman, (1964) Vol. 2 page 14-7 )
But .
. . what do you do with linear acceleration? Linear acceleration
can be detected absolutely too. Does absolute acceleration result in
absolute motion or only relative motion? (See Sagnac
effect in translational motion)
Another
problem is implied by the compensation given to clocks in the Global
Positioning System. Clocks in orbit will run slow compared to a clock
on the ground. Hence, the clocks for orbit are precalibrated to run
slightly fast while they are on the ground so that they will have the
same manifested clock rate as the ground clock when in orbit. It is
clear that this compensation cannot be symmetric. That is, the same
compensation cannot be applied to either set of clocks. That means that
the motion is not "purely relative" as claimed by Special Relativity.
You
have probably read through the Einstein train example in the textbooks.
There are two lightning strikes, one at either end of the train. Both
are simultaneous to an observer on the ground at the midpoint next to
the train. But they are not simultaneous to the observer riding at the
middle of the moving train (at least that is what we think, even though
no one actually asks). The math is simple. The logic is
self-consistent. Some would call the whole thing "beautiful and
elegant" (despite the messy physics). The train example seems
intuitive, ironclad, and irrefutable. But does nature
really work this way? We have to be careful. Remember quantum
mechanics? It is illogical, non-intuitive, even weirdly perverse, until
you take into account the ("non-local") effects of three-dimensional
time. Then it becomes substantially more intuitive. Photons are very
quantum mechanical, even those used by Einstein's train. If
you add in the effect of temporal motion to the train problem, you will
preserve simultaneity of distant events. But if you do that, you are
effectively working the problem in "motional dimensions" instead of
4-dimensional space-time, and again Special Relativity does not apply.
Keep
in mind here that Special Relativity and General Relativity are local
theories. They artificially (but usefully) map temporal motion into a
spatial reference system:
In
1905 Albert Einstein's
Special Theory of Relativity postulated that no material or energy can
travel faster than the speed of light, and Einstein thereby sought to
reformulate physical laws in a way which obeyed the principle of
locality. He later succeeded in producing an alternative theory of
gravitation, General Relativity, which obeys the principle of
locality. ("Principle of
locality", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_locality
)
In
General Relativity, the
"locality" arises by treating space as a connecting medium, rather than
as something that separates. It is much like the
Faraday/Maxwell
field concept where the field was "action through a medium from
one portion to the contiguous portion". The idea of
being
"spatially connected" is virtually the definition of "locality".
The
Universe is both local
and non-local in its
fundamental nature. It is a mistake to try (in general) to
map non-local phenomena into a local reference system. This
realization was not around in 1905. The only well-known non-local
phenomena back then were the action-at-a-distance "fields" of
gravitation, magnetism, and electrostatics. The field concept was an
attempt to make their non-local behavior more like local behavior, and
thus more compatible with human intuition. Arguably, the first
"hard-core" contact with non-locality came with Quantum Mechanics in
the 1920s. Later, came the EPR "paradox" (1935) at Einstein's own hand,
who again argued for a "local" interpretation. The Aharonov–Bohm effect
emerged in 1949-1959. Then Chalmers W. Sherwin and Robert D. Rawcliffe experiment in 1960.
Then Bell's
Inequality Theorem in 1964. Then the experiments of John
Clauser and Stuart Freedman (1972) and Alain Aspect (1981). These
experiments (and others) demonstrated non-local behaviors at a
fundamental level. Out-of-scope application of Relativity to non-local
phenomena at the insistence (tyranny?) of the scientific community has
resulted in a lot of misunderstandings (and animosity) and has held
back advancement of physics for over 100 years. Scientists still insist
that the speed of gravity, magnetic, and electric fields are limited to
the speed of light. (A major misconception: see the speed
of gravity and
the speed of electric
fields )
The
so-called Twin Paradox has a similar standing. This is where one twin
stays on Earth and the other goes away in a rocket ship at some
significant fraction of the speed of light. Upon his return, he has
aged less than his twin on Earth. But this is not
the official paradox; this is just a simple prediction of Special
Relativity. The paradox is that either twin can
be viewed as being younger than the other, because the motion can only
be "purely relative". The fact that the cause of
one type of motion can be distinguished from the other is irrelevant to
the paradox. That physicists so readily accept this paradox
as science (which itself has not been demonstrated) says some really
awful things about our science institutions. (My "take" on
this is that the twin moving at high speed, ages relative to a
"flow-of-space clock", with time not progressing,
and the twin on Earth, ages relative to a "flow-of-time clock" with space
not progressing. Both age at the same rate (but on different types of
clocks), and have the same final age on Earth. There is no paradox if
the ages are referred to the progression of an "orthogonal sum" clock that
incorporates both time and space progression
effects. The effects of both
local and non-local behaviors need to be taken into account.)
Another
hint that motion is not "purely relative" is implied by Faraday's rule
of induction. Says Feynman:
"So
the "flux rule"—that
the emf in a
circuit is equal to the rate of change of the magnetic flux through the
circuit—applies
whether the flux changes because the field changes or because the
circuit moves (or both). The two possibilities—"circuit moves" or
"field changes"—are
not distinguished in the statement of the rule. Yet in our explanation
of the rule we have used two completely distinct laws for the two cases— v
x B for "circuit
moves" and del x E
= -¶B/¶t for
"field changes".
We
know of no other place in physics where
such a simple and accurate general principle requires for its real
understanding an analysis in terms of two different phenomena. Usually
such a beautiful generalization is found to stem from a single deep
underlying principle. Nevertheless, in the case there does not appear
to be any such profound implication. We have to understand the "rule"
as the combined effects of two quite separate phenomena."— Richard P.
Feynman, The Feynman Lectures on Physics Vol. II,
pp. 17-2
Note the asymmetry in the
behavior. This seems to imply some sort of absolute motion. We probably
are indeed missing a "single deep
underlying
principle" with a "profound implication". See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_Paradox
Similar experiments with
a charged disk, and a B field detector also give analogous
paradoxical results. See ../qm/RadiationCircularChargeMotion.html#FeynmanFaradayFluxRuleParadox
and SpeedMagneticField
.
Einstein's Special and General
Relativity theories are, as the names suggest, theories of relative motion.
You cannot expect such theories to deliver deep insights
about absolute
motion, because that kind of motion is simply out-of-scope.
Another "paradox"
is becoming evident in sunspot observations:
"This
first solar image from NuSTAR demonstrates that the telescope can in
fact gather data about sun. And it gives insight into questions about
the remarkably high temperatures that are found above sunspots—cool,
dark patches on the sun. Future images will provide even better data as
the sun winds down in its solar cycle." http://phys.org/news/2014-12-sun-sizzles-high-energy-x-rays.html
A sunspot
is roughly
4000 K, versus 5800 K for the photosphere. High temperatures, X-rays,
and magnetic fields suggest that sunspot activity has
a non-local character. Its relationship
with our
reference system would become inverted: hot stuff will appear
cooler. This could mean that sunspots could be far hotter
than we
might imagine. The gas could be fully ionized, and being therefore
unable to absorb radiation, would become transparent. They should also expand
(not contract) with time as they cool down. (
Apparently, something similar can happen on a galactic scale:
"Mystery
Galactic Gamma-ray 'Bubbles' Defy
Explanation", Ian O'Neill (Aug 1, 2014)
http://news.discovery.com/space/galaxies/mystery-galactic-gamma-ray-bubbles-still-defy-explanation-140801.htm
Hypothetically, the hot stuff would appear as microwaves, but
when the observational situation re-inverts back to "local", the
microwaves then look like gamma rays. If the inversion point is the
Rydberg frequency, the math is roughly
(1/(109/1016
)) ( 1016 ) = 1023
Hertz. The jet in the M87galaxy
(shown above)
may likewise be an example of re-localization behavior. As
gravitation reduces the speed of the ejected material, it becomes more
"local" and begins to expand as a spatial object. It is
astonishing to realize that M87 is probably ejecting galaxies
in these jets (as per Dr. Halton Arp), and that our own Milky Way could
have been one of them!)
Effects
of the reference system are not limited to Special Relativity. When you
do physics experiments, you get two effects that become combined. One
effect is the "pure physics" part, and the other is reference system
effects that are combined in with the results, often in insidious,
covert, almost perverse ways. This is true even of the commonly used
Euclidean metric.
A
classical example is the one in which an object is dropped high from
the mast of a moving boat. The object will fall straight down to the
bottom of the mast, at least as seen by people on the boat. But a
person on land will see a different picture. The object has both
forward motion due to the boat and downward motion due to gravity. When
viewed against the background of a mountain, the object actually falls
on a parabolic path, like a bomb dropped from an airplane. Of course,
the observer must either have very keen observation skills, or some
good photographic equipment to actually see this. Physicists understand
this one, and can easily sort out the two, even though people will
still ask, "But what did it really
do? Did it fall down straight or curved?
It cannot be both . . ." But physics will only tell us what we see from
what viewpoint. If we could see things from "God's perspective", we
would know what it "really" does. Alas, most of us think we are still
human.
The
trouble really starts when the reference system effects are not
understood. Astronomers realize that the Universe is expanding. Far
galaxies have a recession velocity, implied by the observed redshifts
of spectral lines. Most galaxies are moving away from us in all
directions at various speeds. But unless you believe that we occupy a
privileged observational position, our galaxy is also participating in
the same expansion. Some of that redshift belongs to us. But
astronomers take our position as "stationary" and assign the full
redshift (or velocity) value to the observed galaxy. The galaxy is
assigned a velocity that it does not really have, and our position is
regarded as having zero velocity, something that it does not really
have either (and I am only referring to the recession, not all the
other known motions).
Another
related mess concerns what I call the gravipause:
"The
belief from decades
ago was that the (cosmological) redshift was caused by the Big Bang
that blew everything apart, resulting in the observational redshift.
But the Cosmological Principle points out a problem with that. If
everything is supposed to look statistically the same from all
viewpoints, then observers in other galaxies must be seeing the same
kind of redshift behavior. In other words the redshift must result from
a CENTERLESS expansion of space , not from an explosion.
The view that is gaining
currency now is that space itself expands or is "emergent" (new spatial
units are being generated by some unknown process). It is like time, in
that it progresses. But it progresses in three dimensions, and we call
that an expansion.
Opposing the expansion is
gravitation, which is centered on an object (planet, star, galaxy). We
interpret the resulting motions in terms of forces, the cosmological
expansion force, which is not affected by distance, and the
gravitational force, which has a 1/d^2 dependence. Because of this,
there is necessarily a distance where the forces are at equilibrium, a
distance I call the "gravipause" (which, in this definition, involves
only ONE body, and space itself). For stars it is apparently a few
light years, and for galaxies it is apparently a few million light
years. Inside this distance, objects come together, and outside this
distance, objects move apart (and faster the farther apart, because of
the lessening influence of gravitation, and because there are more
lengthening units of space in between, like links in a chain).
Astronomers surely
understand these things. But they don't seem to recognize the
implications. What happens to the Big Bang theory if the redshift did
not come from an explosion? They know about Einstein's cosmological
constant and gravitational force, but they do not recognize that the
two imply a gravipause. Also, the calculated "Hubble constant" would be
dependent on the location from which the observations are made (a large
versus small galaxy), and they don't recognize that either. And why are
stars separated by light years, but not by light weeks? Why don't
globular clusters collapse? And so forth." " http://intjforum.com/showthread.php?t=69831
(Related: "Lemaître’s Limit
", Ian Steer http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1212/1212.6566.pdf
; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hill_sphere
)
Here
we see an applicability problem, even when the common metric for
spatial distance is used. Gravitation seems to have three regions.
Gravitational force near a star starts out strong but declines rapidly
with distance (the 1/d2
region). At the gravipause, gravitation is still present, but
falls off less rapidly (the 1/d1
region, or "Hubble space" as it could be called). Beyond that,
quantization causes the gravitation to disappear completely (the 1/d0 region, where
it does not decrease at all, because there isn't any). At this
juncture, the only effective "force" involved is the expansion of
space, which hypothetically is proceeding at the speed of light. Hence,
all very distant galaxies should be receding at the speed of light
(there is no gravitational effect, applicable to our observational
position, that would decrease the observed speed). This would give a
redshift of z = 1.
Additionally,
Einstein
and Lemaître recognized that, according to theory, the structures
(galaxies) in the Universe could not be inherently stable.
Gravitation would eventually pull everything together. If
there
were some kind of opposing force, then there would be yet another kind
of instability that would cause these structures to fly apart. Yet
observations of globular clusters and galaxies imply that
these
structures are definitely stable. They are very old, yet do not expand
and do not collapse. Neither instability is being observed. And buried
in this is yet another problem. The outer stars on the rim of
a
galaxy are moving so rapidly that they should be flung away from the
galaxy, like water on a spinning bicycle wheel. Yet that is
not
the case. Astronomers invent "dark matter" to glue galactic stars
together into a collection that does not fly apart. The
amount of
dark matter in the Universe is estimated to be about five times the
mass that is visible. With precisely the right distribution, the
galaxies can be made stable again in this theoretical picture.
But where is the observational
evidence for dark matter? If it is there, what sort of
conceptual
mutilations are required for the stability of globular clusters? The
problem with them is not that they fly apart, but that they do not
collapse. Many of these clusters show no appreciable rotation—no
"centrifugal force" to keep the stars separated. Adding more matter—dark
matter by a factor of five—should
cause them to collapse rapidly. One is left with
the
impession that modern astronomers are studying their own mythical
creations and wasting astronomical amounts of taxpayer monies.
This
comment from Wikipedia seems appropriate here:
The accelerating
universe
is the observation that the universe appears to be expanding
at an increasing rate. In formal terms, this means that the cosmic
scale factor a(t)
has a positive second
derivative,[1]
so that the velocity at which a distant galaxy is receding from us
should be continually increasing with time.[2]
The first suggestion for accelerating universe from observed data
happened in 1992, by Paál
et. al.[3]
In 1998, observations of type
Ia supernovae also suggested that the expansion of the universe
has been accelerating[4][5]
since around redshift
of z~0.5.[6]
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerating_expansion_of_the_cosmos
)
Note
the phrase "since around redshift
of z~0.5." I would expect this to be around redshift of z = 1
instead. But remember, half of that redshift is due to our own galactic
recession motion (which is zero from our standpoint), and half of it is
due to the recession affecting the observed galaxy. Have the
astronomers unwittingly included a reference system effect here? What
is the true physical redshift? I think this is a
good question.
A
more fundamental metric
We
presently use spatial displacement and
time progression displacement as our reference system. It is based on differences
of location, not on true physical units of space and time, and it
creates an arbitrary zero datum. The construct is
useful, but not fundamental. Of course, physicists will complain that
there isn't any such thing as a "physical unit" of space or time. But
that is ok. As was quoted above, their comrades are trying to get rid
of the concept of space and time as being fundamental
anyway. They are claiming that motion is primary, and that space and
time are derived concepts. In other words, we really need a "motional
metric" and need to work some of our physics problems in "motional
dimensions", not space or time displacement dimensions.
This
notion does indeed have a basis in fundamental physical equations. We
are all familiar with E=mc2 . Note that there
is no separate time term. E=cB (in electromagnetics) is another one.
Again, note that there is no separate time term. And Newton's
gravitation: F = G (m2m2)/r2
. No time term there either. Time shows up only when connected with
space, as in c, the speed of light. Its
appearance in Newton's gravitation is concealed as a "motional
potential" (expressed as force), and motion is, again, a relationship
between space and time. Even in quantum mechanics, time is merely a
parameter. The implication is that space and time are not
truly fundamental, and that motion
should be a more useful and fundamental
concept. But if motion is the fundamental concept, then both
space/time ("velocity" ) and time/space ("inverse velocity")
are legitimate concepts. The former is "local" and the latter is
"non-local". (The implications of this are mind-boggling. )
There
will be resistance to this kind of thinking, the likes of which have
occurred before. Remember our troubles with numbers? First,
there were the "counting integers", which made perfect sense. Then
someone came up with the concept of a "zero" —a
number to represent nothing (unknown to the Romans). Then negative
numbers came along (how could you have a number
that was less than nothing?!).
Then along came Pythagorus and "irrational numbers", the geometric
representation of which, could be constructed with an ordinary compass
and straight-edge (scandalous!). Still later, "imaginary numbers" came
on the scene. At first, this baffled even the most brilliant
mathematicians. But the need for them arose naturally in fairly
ordinary mathematics, and the concept is now well accepted and very
useful. I think the same will happen with "inverse velocity" (the term
is actually self-contradictory because there is no trajectory and the
effect is instantaneous).
Fundamentally,
space and time seem to be progressing. They are
not static. They are "emergent" as some physicists are
claiming. This is no surprise, really, if motion
is the fundamental entity for the physical universe. Space and time
could be identical twins that are always linked together in a ratio
called motion. This requires them to progress, for example, as 1/1,
2/2, 3/3 etc. The individual units are always changing, progressing,
but the ratio remains
constant. The ratio is "stationary" even though it has "moving parts",
progressing at the speed of light (we will suppose). Yeegads! The "rest
frame" is not resting! The speed of light thus becomes the new "zero"
(actually 1/1), the datum for no activity. This realization will allow
physicists to develop a new metric, one that actually applies fundamentally
to the physical universe. (See also UnitEnergy)
This
would also answer common questions that appear in the popular media.
Example: "Where Is The Center of the Universe?" by Rose Pastore (Popular
Science 4-20-2012, http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2012-04/fyi-where-center-universe
)
"First,
it’s important to know that the big bang wasn’t an explosion of matter
into empty space--it was the rapid expansion of space itself. This
means that every single point in the universe appears to be at the
center. . . . In the beginning, the universe was a single point. Where
was that? It was, and still is, everywhere."
This
anywhere/everywhere location of a "center" clearly has a non-local
character. Said differently, it is simply a centerless
expansion. And following that line of thought leads to the conclusion
that it is also edgeless. The edge must be everywhere too. (perhaps the
diffuse microwave background,
and the diffuse gamma ray background, and the diffuse X-ray background, and the
diffuse Far UltraViolet background, and the diffuse cosmic ray
background, are
trying to tell us something*). See also “The
Mystery of the Cosmic Diffuse Ultraviolet Background Radiation”, http://arxiv.org/abs/1404.5714
; http://phys.org/news/2015-08-cosmic-mystery-deepens-discovery-ultra-high-energy.html#nRlv
;
*"What we know as the universe could
actually be just one of a pair that exists in the same space but at
different times." (Science
News,
July 25, 2015, p. 17 "Times Arrow". My thoughts: There may
indeed
be two "parts" or "sectors" to our Universe. One has matter that
gravitates in three-dimensional space and is localized in space. The
other has "inverse matter" that gravitates in
three-dimensional
time and is "non-local" (spatially diffuse) from our
standpoint.
They operate by the same physical laws and would be statistically
indistinguishable to an observer within each system. )
The
use of "motional dimensions" as a fundamental unit implies that where
(or when) there is no (fundamental) motion, there is no "physical"
universe. There is no "where" there, and no "there" there either. If
there is no "box", there is no inside or outside either. (The same
arguments apply to time.)
There
is no reason a spatial viewpoint has to be preferred in the ultimate
reference system. Motion can be in space or in time (s/t or t/s) See article.
If we could view things from the standpoint of the speed of light (in
three dimensions), space would not be expanding. The progression of
time cancels the progression (expansion) of space, given the
supposition that they are always paired into a ratio. Photons
would be stationary. They go no-where and no-when. Mass would be what
has actual motion (gravitation) relative to the 1/1 motional datum
"fabric" or "ether". Gravitation would make mass move "towards" other
masses and those masses would be colliding with the stationary photons
in the process. (Photons "collide" or "separate" only when space or
time locations are considered individually; this is the reverse of the
EPR effect; See also Variations
in the speed of light )
The
null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment needs to incorporate
this insight. This experiment intended to measure the effect of the
Earth's relative motion through the ether, the "Aether Wind".
But the fundamental motions of both the Earth and
the ether are non-directional (i.e., scalar, like the progression of
time). They cannot be added vectorially. The
design of the experiment did not take this into account. The "ether
wind" could not be detected, and this was taken as evidence for the
non-existence of the ether itself—a
conclusion that is not really justified. There may indeed still be an
"ether" (a specific structure of space and time), but it is not the
old, mechanical, "wavable medium" type of the 1800s, nor is it "empty
space". The "new ether" must be a dynamic
one (progressing and non-directional), something quite different from
the static ether of the
nineteenth century. (See also Gravitational
motion has multiple dimensions )
All
this is exactly backwards to the way we think the Universe "obviously"
works. Physicists and astronomers seem to have little trouble believing
that "space exploded" and caused the Universe to come into existence.
But the views presented here will seem even weirder, and so don't
expect classes in hyperspace navigation to be offered at your local
university anytime soon :-).
Links:
"Universe
boundary in Einstein 1931 same as Lemaître 1927" ( http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015AAS...22521504S
) a snippet: ". . . universe in balance, changing but always
steady, eternal but ever-reborn, is exactly what we observe.")
"Einstein’s
aborted attempt at a dynamic steady-state universe", http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1402/1402.4099.pdf
html 3/2012h
Formation of Galactic jets
a
future topic?
Why
is gravitation an accelerated
motion? What powers gravity?
Acceleration
normally causes an increase in speed and change
of position. When you accelerate your car on the freeway, you are
changing your position and your speed. An engine is required to power
this acceleration. If gravitation is equivalent to accelerated motion,
then what powers the gravitational engine? And when I stand on Earth, I
am being accelerated by it. So where am I going? What is my
current velocity after many years of acceleration at 9.8 m/sec2
? How far have I gone during my lifetime? Why am I
still in the same old solar system that I was in years ago?
To
answer
this, we need to know what other kinds of motion
can cause acceleration. Acceleration can cause a
change of speed or a change of direction
(or both). In the car we think of acceleration as changing our speed.
But we would also be accelerated if our direction were changing
(through use of the steering wheel) even though our miles-per-hour were
constant.
Let's
suppose a mysterious thing happened to my
house. While I slept, the entire house began quietly
rotating. I wake up the next morning and pour myself some coffee. In
the kitchen the coffee goes straight into the cup, just as I would
expect. Then I wander into the living room. I pour myself another cup,
but the coffee stream goes somewhat sideways instead of straight down.
I begin thinking, "The house is settling . . . must be on the
edge of a sink hole." But I pour another cup in the kitchen
and it again goes straight down. The stream only deviates when I get
near the outer walls in other parts of the house. It is as though there
is a kind of "bent gravity" or "wall magnetism" or
something. I have no idea what causes it. It is just a mysterious force
that was not there yesterday. I know forces result in acceleration. So
I start asking myself the same questions: "Where am I going?
What is my current velocity? . . ."
To
an
observer outside
the house, there is no such mysterious force. The effect is caused by
rotational motion. A physicist describes it this way:
"Another
example of pseudo force is what is often
called "centrifugal force." An observer in a rotating coordinate
system, e.g. in a rotating box, will find mysterious forces, not
accounted for by any known origin of force, throwing things outward
toward the walls. These forces are due merely to the fact that the
observer does not have Newton's coordinate system . . ." (The
Feynman Lectures on Physics, Vol. I, p. 12-11)
Hmmm
. . . That reminds us of the Einstein
elevator. We gave the elevator a linear acceleration of 9.8 m/sec2
by powering it with a small
rocket engine
and the result was indistinguishable from normal gravity.
But here we see an alternative. We could put the Einstein elevator in a
centrifuge and whirl it around with increasing speed until the occupant
experiences the same acceleration. But there is an obvious difference.
After the centrifuge gets up to speed, we can turn off the power. The
occupant will still experience acceleration even
though nothing is powering it (in a normal elevator, the acceleration
would stop immediately, but the speed would continue at its last value
if the deceleration due to Earth's gravity is ignored) So
here we have the equivalent of "gravity", but there is nothing that
powers it. The effect results from uniform, unchanging motion. But it
has to be motion of a special sort: rotational
motion.
So
now we must ask, Could gravitation be a pseudo
force? Physicists have asked the same question:
"One
very important feature of pseudo forces is
that they are always proportional to the masses; the same is true of
gravity. The possibility exists, therefore, that gravity is
itself a pseudo force. Is it not possible that perhaps
gravitation is due simply to the fact that we do not have the right
coordinate system?" (The Feynman Lectures on Physics,
Vol. I, p. 12-11)
In
their ultimate character, we could say:
rotational
motion is a uniform change of direction
with no change of position
temporal
motion is a change of position with no
inherent direction
In
other words it could be that this kind of
temporal motion (i.e., gravitational motion) is a completely uniform unaccelerated
motion when seen from a more complete, true-to-all-facts reference
system. It needs nothing to power it. But because we are in a
spatial reference system, we
experience it as accelerated motion. This is just an idea of course,
and needs further investigation and exposition. (Update: See Beyond
Einstein: non-local Physics .)
"And
what is hidden he
brings out to the light" —Job 28:11
html 11/03
The
Kinematic Time Shift, Gravitational Time Shift
The existence
of kinematic and gravitational time shifts were confirmed by the Hafele
and Keating Experiment in 1971. (Kinematics pertains to times, lengths, speeds, etc.
Essentially, it is concerned only with the space and time coordinates,
and has nothing to do with masses and gravitation.) The Georgia
State University physics/astronomy web site offers us this summary:
Hafele
and Keating Experiment
"During October, 1971, four cesium atomic beam clocks were flown on
regularly scheduled commercial jet flights around the world twice, once
eastward and once westward, to test Einstein's theory of relativity
with macroscopic clocks. From the actual flight paths of each trip, the
theory predicted that the flyng clocks, compared with reference clocks
at the U.S. Naval Observatory, should have lost 40+/-23 nanoseconds
during the eastward trip and should have gained 275+/-21 nanoseconds
during the westward trip ... Relative to the atomic time scale of the
U.S. Naval Observatory, the flying clocks lost 59+/-10 nanoseconds
during the eastward trip and gained 273+/-7 nanosecond during the
westward trip, where the errors are the corresponding standard
deviations. These results provide an unambiguous empirical resolution
of the famous clock "paradox" with macroscopic clocks." J.C.
Hafele and R. E. Keating, Science 177, 166 (1972) See http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/airtim.html
Around-the-World
Atomic Clocks
In October 1971, Hafele and Keating flew cesium beam atomic clocks
around the world twice on regularly scheduled commercial airline
flights, once to the East and once to the West. In this experiment,
both gravitational time dilation and kinematic time dilation are
significant - and are in fact of comparable magnitude. Their predicted
and measured time dilation effects were as follows:
Predicted:
Time difference in ns
Eastward
Westward
Gravitational 144 ± 14
179 ± 18
Kinematic
-184 ± 18
96 ± 10
Net
effect
-40 ± 23
275 ± 21
Observed:
-59
± 10
273 ± 21
See http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/airtim.html
The kinematic time shift should be
understandable in view of what is presented above about the Relativistic Correction Factor, gamma.
But we seem to be left with the question of "Why would a
clock slow down when it is immersed in a gravitational
field?" Most people's reaction is that if a clock acts that
way, then it is not a very good clock. Or if it is a good clock, then
it must be measuring something, but it is not
measuring time. Although this behavior looks
rather enigmatic, an explanation can be offered that is simple
and intuitive.
The time shift
formula is:
(TA-TE)/TE
= gh/c2
where TA
is
the elapsed time on
the clock at altitude, TE is the elapsed time
on the clock on Earth, g is the acceleration of gravity, h is the
height difference in meters, and c is the speed of light.
(Note the similarity to the gravitational redshift/blueshift
formula: v/c = gh/c2 ).
Let's mentally
estimate how small of an effect we are looking for on the right side of
the equation. Taking g as 9.8 m/sec2, h as one
meter, and c as 3 x 108 m/sec, we can
readily see the ratio is about 1 part in 1016—an extremely small effect.
Now plug in some
numbers from the Hafele and Keating experiment on the left
side of the equation:
(179
x 10-9sec)
(48.6 hours)(3600 sec/hour)
That
gives 1.02 x 10-12 for a height difference of
9400 meters. Dividing out the 9400 gives 1.085 x 10-16 which agrees well with our mental
estimate for a one meter height difference.
Consider the
conventional explanation for this effect from The Feynman
Lectures on Physics (Vol.2, section 42-6 "Speed of clocks in
a gravitational field")
"Suppose we
put a clock at the "head" of the rocket ship—that is, at the
"front" end—and we put another identical clock at the "tail" . . . . If
we compare these two clocks when the ship is accelerating, the clock at
the head seems to run fast relative to the one at the tail." (p. 42-9)
The
critical thing to
understand here is where the clocks are located relative to the motion
of the rocket ship. In my elevator example, they would have to be
mounted on the ceiling and on the floor, not on the
side walls. Understanding the effect is
straight-forward and is exactly like the explanation for gravitational
redshift/blueshift. Suppose the upper clock is used to
control a device that emits pulses of light. The light pulses are
emitted once every second and shine downward to a detector on the
floor, which compares their timing upon arrival with an identical clock
on the floor. During the transit interval of the pulse from ceiling to
floor, the elevator is accelerating and the detector is therefore
moving faster than it was when the pulse was first emitted. The
detector is moving towards the
emitter and sees the pulses as "crammed together slightly".
(This is just like a Doppler shift with an extremely low frequency
source—something
we call a "clock".) The time separation between the pulses
is now less than a second. We
could say that the equipment on the floor wonders why the pulses are
coming in faster than expected. It concludes that the clock on the
ceiling that controls the emitter pulse stream is running fast (or that
the clock on the floor is running slow).
We
will reach the
very same conclusion if we put the emitter on the floor and the
detector on the ceiling. In this case the detector is moving away
from the light pulse at a speed slightly faster than when the pulse was
emitted. It sees the incoming pulses "stretched out". The
interval between the pulses is now more
than a second. And so we conclude that the clock on the floor must be
running slow (or the one on the ceiling is running fast). Even though
we have reversed the positions of the equipment, we still reach the
same conclusion.
Now
consider some
variations that could be introduced.
1.
We leave the
emitter and detector on the floor (or ceiling) so that the light path
is aligned in the same direction as the motion of the elevator. But we
set the elevator to a constant speed (no acceleration). In this case no
time shift will be detected. Similarly, no redshift/blueshift would be
detected either. The speeds of emitter and detector remain the same and
there is no Doppler shift detectable within the
elevator.
2.
We relocate the
emitter and detector (and their clocks) so that they are on the side
walls of the elevator and the light path is now perpendicular
(transverse) to the motion of the elevator. In this case there will
again be no time shift, nor redshift/blueshift. There will be
no effect detectable within the elevator regardless of whether it is
moving at constant speed or accelerating. The path of the light is
slightly elongated due to the combination of the motions (a straight
diagonal line for constant speed, or a slight curve for accelerated
speed). The detector, however, can detect only the timing between
pulses, and once they start arriving, the pulse rate is the same.
3.
We put the emitter
on a rocket ship and the detector on earth. In this case we will see
the conventional Doppler shift. We can tell whether the rocket is
moving towards us or away from us. We can also detect whether its speed
relative to Earth is constant, accelerating, or even zero. But only the
"radial component of the speed" (the portion directly towards or away
from Earth) is detectable. This principle is widely used by astronomers.
So is
there a problem with the clocks or
not? No, the problem is with our intuition and the reference
system. Gravity is an ordinary everyday thing. We simply do not expect,
offhand, that gravity would have any effect on a time
measurement. In contrast, hardly any of us have to measure
precise time intervals within a vehicle that is changing speed or
direction (accelerating). But if that were an
everyday task, we would be quite comfortable with the
gravitational time shift too, because an accelerating reference system
has the same effects on time interval measurement as gravity.
"You do
not know the activity of God
who makes all things." —Ecclesiastes
11:5
html
2/03
edited 7/07
"Motion
Cancellers"
(If
you are just jumping into this section, you might need some background
from: Apparent
Properties of Space and Time )
A motion canceller
(my own term) is a scheme that
can be used to cancel (or counterbalance) one motion of a
multidimensional motion so that the other motions, which are usually
not apparent, become manifest. The resultant motions are perpendicular
to the motion used for cancellation.
As applied to
gravitation, it means that you can
apply a canceling motion (or "force" if you prefer the term) to a
stationary object, and it will begin moving (or exerting a force), not
in the direction of the canceling motion, but in a direction perpendicular
to it.
To get a better
intuitive feel for this, consider a
non-technical example. It consists of an ordinary spool of thread, a
pin, and a card (a business card will do) assembled as shown in the
illustration below. Hold the card on the bottom of the spool (using the
pin to center it in the hole) and then blow air down the shaft with
your mouth. While you are blowing, move your hand away from the card.
What do you think will happen?
As every kid who has
tried this in an elementary
science class knows, the card will not be blown off the spool. It will
remain attracted to the bottom as long as air is blown through the
hollow shaft of the spool. This little experiment is used to illustrate
the Bernoulli and Coanda effects of moving fluids. The principle has
widespread applications in industry. A few obvious ones are carburetors
in cars, steam jet ejectors used for refrigeration, perfume
atomizers, and Bernoulli wands used by the semiconductor industry to
lift and move silicon wafers without touching the circuit side (not to
be confused with vacuum wands, which are used on the backside).
How does it work? The
card is normally bombarded by
air molecules coming from all directions and having every orientation.
Each ricocheting air molecule has a momentum component that is
perpendicular to the face of the card. All these components add up to
produce a pressure on each face of the card. As long as the card is
fully immersed in air and the bombardment is random, the pressures will
be equal, and the card does not move.
But when the card is
placed near the spool, and air
is blown through the shaft, the pressures become unbalanced. The air
flow bends parallel to the surface of the card, and the perpendicular
component on the spool side is literally "blown away" (partially). The
perpendicular component on the other side of the card is thus
unopposed, and an unbalanced pressure develops which moves the card
towards the spool. The harder you blow, the more firmly the card moves
towards the spool. (The pin simply keeps the card from sliding
sideways.)
A
slide from my presentation "The
Quest for the Stardrive"
Note that air moving
in two dimensions, in a plane
parallel to the card, has caused the card to move perpendicular to the
air flow. It has made apparent the existence of an effect that is
otherwise not observable. One motion is used to cancel a hidden motion;
the "canceller motion" does not directly produce the resulting motion,
but allows an existing motion to become manifest. (loosely, this meets
the definition of a motion canceller.) If you could repeat
the equivalent of this experiment in the vacuum of outer space, the
card would simply be blown off, as there is no opposing motion from air
molecules. (See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coand%C4%83_effect
, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnus_effect
, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trench_effect
)
The motion canceller idea
can also give us insights on physical concepts that otherwise seem to
be counter intuitive. One class of problems of this sort involves the
Poynting vector. This vector, S = e0c2
E X B, tells us how
electromagnetic energy flows in space. It is often encountered in
discussions about the properties of light, but it applies to other
things too, like electric current in capacitors, a resistance wire,
magnets with static charges, and so on. It often implies some
surprising, and seemingly awkward things. Here is a textbook example
from Feynman Lectures on Physics:
"Now we take another
example. Here is a rather
curious one. We look at the energy flow in a capacitor that we are
charging slowly. . . . There is a nearly uniform electric field inside
which is changing with time. . . . So there must be a flow of energy
into that volume from somewhere. Of course, you know that it must come
in on the charging wires—not at all! It can't enter the space between
the plates from that direction, because E
is perpendicular to the plates; E
X B
must be parallel to the plates.
You remember, of
course, that there is a magnetic
field that circles around the axis when the capacitor is charging. . .
. Its direction is shown in [the figure]. So there is an energy flow
proportional to E X B
that comes in all around the edges as shown in the figure. The energy
isn't actually coming down the wires, but from the space surrounding
the capacitor." (Feynman Lectures on Physics, Vol
II, p. 27-7)
Also:
"Our
programme of measurement of forces related to electromagnetic momentum
at low frequencies in matter has culminated in the first direct
observation of free electromagnetic angular momentum created by
quasistatic and independent electromagnetic fields E and B in the
vacuum gap of a cylindrical capacitor. A resonant suspension is used to
detect its motion. The observed changes in angular momentum agree with
the classical theory within the error ~ 20%. This implies that the
vacuum is the seat of something in motion whenever static fields are
sat up with non-vanishing Poynting vector, as Maxwell and Poynting
foresaw. " (“Observation of static electromagnetic angular momentum in
vacuo", M.Graham, D.G.Lahoz. Nature, 285, 154,
1980. http://www.tts.lt/~nara/introduc/introduc.htm
)
(This
also brings to
mind another topic of popular interest: the Biefeld-Brown
effect. Suppose the capacitor is asymmetric
in that it has plates with very different areas. The electric field
will be shaped somewhat like a cone, instead of a cylinder, and will be
highly divergent. The "lifters" constructed with such
principles are usually "leaky", due to corona effects, and require
electric current to keep them charged. The current is of course
accompanied by a magnetic field. The resultant Poynting
vector is directed inward toward the central axis, but now also has a
vertical component. Could this flow of energy/momentum be related to
the source of lift claimed for these devices? And does the electric
gradient between the ionosphere and the earth (about 100 volts per
meter) have anything to do with lift generation? Do lifters work better on pulsed monopolar high voltage? Refs: http://jnaudin.free.fr/lifters/main.htm
, http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/nasarep.htm
, http://www.americanantigravity.com/about.html
, http://www.meridian-int-res.com/Aeronautics/APS.htm
The asymmetric construction may be a way of
dealing with
the gravitational symmetry
problem.
(Yet
another thought on this involves a moving
dielectric. The lifters use an air dielectric, which, due to the ion
wind effect, is moving through the capacitor plates. This means it is
always charging (because it is getting "new" unpolarized dielectric)
and therefore developing a Poynting vector. The thrust might be the sum
of the ion wind momentum transfer and the
electromagnetic
momentum denoted by the Poynting vector. This suggests a couple of
other variations. Make a dielectric disk out of barium
titanate and rotate it. A pair of (asymmetric) electrodes charges a
portion of the disk as it rotates, and another pair of electrodes
discharges the portion as it rotates under the second pair (either
discarding the energy or recycling it). Another extremely simple proof
of principle configuration uses oil in a wide-based U -tube. Asymmetric
plates are mounted radially on the glass base of the U-tube. When the
voltage is turned on, the oil should move, and a momentary
pressure differential should cause a difference in the height of the
oil in the vertical sections of the U-tube; this would be intended only
as a demonstration of an effect that does not involve ion wind)
See Update
4-4-11 on the Biefeld-Brown effect:
The
section that was here previously has been moved to:
Poynting vector insights
(electromagnetic momentum)
__________
Let's now try a more
technical example involving gravitational motion.We run electrons
through a metal bar as shown in the illustration below:
(The idea
that an electron is equivalent to rotational space ("spin space" as
contrasted to extension space) is discussed more thoroughly in the
first three articles of Some
Thought Provoking Issues. It is also illustrative to compare
the space/time dimensions of mv2
and Li2 . Both must reduce
to the dimensions of energy. According to the discussion of
the Hamiltonian, energy is
t/s and mass is t3/s3.
If electron current is space per time, then the dimensions of L
(inductance) must be t3/s3,
which is the same as that for mass. This makes perfect sense: the
nature of the bar is not changed by moving it through space, nor is it
changed by moving space through the bar. See also Feynman, Lectures,
Vol 2, p. 17-12)
In this example, the
bar is moving in all three
dimensions of extension space simultaneously. (This multidimensional
motion of one object is
somewhat difficult to visualize, and you might need to review the above
two sections about Gravitational
Lensing and Gravitational
Redshift.) The motion of the electron space through the bar
"cancels" the spatial motion of the bar in one dimension. The other two
dimensions of the gravitational motion are still active and act
perpendicularly (radially) to the long axis of the bar. This resultant
is a still a scalar motion and will become manifest with
another object possessing the same type of motion. Hence, two
wires so treated will be moving "towards" each other. This is an effect
that we call "magnetic". Also, because it is two-dimensional,
the resulting motion is "orientable" in the context of a
gravitationally bound reference system.
This
situation also reminds me of an oddity noted by Tesla. In some of
his experiments "extra" voltage seemed to come out of nowhere:
This
time it was most intense. Tesla could not get away from the shocks,
regardless of his distance from the apparatus across his considerably
large gallery hall. He scarcely could get near enough to deactivate the
rotating switch. From what he was able to painfully observe, thin
sparks of a bright blue-white color stood straight out of the line with
each electrical contact.
The
shock effects were felt far beyond the visible spark terminations. This
seemed to indicate that their potential was far greater than the
voltage applied to the line. A paradox! The dynamo charge was supplied
at a tension of fifteen thousand volts, yet the stinging sparks were
characteristics of electrostatic discharges exceeding some two hundred
fifty thousand volts. Somehow this input current was being transformed
into a much higher voltage by an unknown process. No natural
explanation could be found. No scientific explanation sufficed. There
was simply not enough data on the phenomenon for an answer. And Tesla
knew that this was no ordinary phenomenon. Somewhere in the heart of
this activity was a deep natural secret. Secrets of this kind always
opened humanity into new revolutions.
Tesla
considered this strange voltage multiplying effect from several
viewpoints. The problem centered around the fact that there was no
magnetic induction taking place. Transformers raise or lower voltage
when current is changing. Here were impulses. Change was happening
during the impulse. But there was no transformer in the circuit. No
wires were close enough for magnetic inductions to take place. Without
magnetic induction, there could theoretically be -no transformation
effect. No conversion from low to high voltage at all. Yet, each switch
snap brought both the radiating blue-white sparks and their painful
sting.
Tesla
noted that the strange sparks were more like electrostatic discharges.
If the sparks had been direct current arcs reaching from the test line,
he would surely have been killed with the very first close of the
switch. The physical pressure and stinging pain of these sparks across
such distances could not be explained. This phenomenon had never been
reported by those who should have seen and felt its activities.
Tesla
gradually came to the conclusion that the shock effect was something
new, something never before observed. He further concluded that the
effect was never seen before because no one had ever constructed such a
powerful impulse generator. No one had ever reported the phenomenon
because no one had ever generated the phenomenon.
Tesla,
now in possession of an effect which was not predicted by Maxwell,
began to question his own knowledge. . . . The
choice was clear: accept the empirical evidence and reject the
conventional theory. For a time he struggled with a way to “derive” the
shock effect phenomenon by mathematically wrestling “validity” from
Maxwell’s equations … but could not. A new electrical principle had
been revealed. . . . What had historically taken
place was
indeed unfortunate. Had Maxwell lived after Tesla’s accidental
discovery, then the effect might have been included in the laws. Of
course, we have to assume that Maxwell would have “chosen” the
phenomenon among those which he considered “fundamental”. (
http://journal.borderlands.com/2010/the-broadcast-power-of-nikola-tesla-part-1/
, Gerry
Vassilatos — from Borderlands
(Vol. LII, Number 2, Second Quarter 1996)
)
Possibly,
this could be related to a motion cancelling effect. The
experiments used monopolar, high voltage, high current, pulsed electrical
discharges.
Alternating current could not produce this effect. Mechanical
pressure and heating effects were also observed. The phrase
"stood straight out of the line" is consistent with a motion cancelling
effect. Possibly, the applied pulse caused something that was balanced
and not observable, to become unbalanced and therefore observable. The
mechanical effects suggest some sort of momentum density change
(Poynting vector) due to the fast changing electrical field. Maxwell's
equations apparently are not inclusive of a d(E)/dt effect.
Note
that this discovery occurred after Maxwell's equations have been
published.
For
more technical examples, see Motion
Couplers and Momentum Converters and Weyl Fermion links.
A
similar effect can be produced by moving a wire through a magnetic
field, or by moving electrons in free space through a magnetic field:
Dimensional
relationships like this involve a
factor of the speed of light. In this case the electric field and the
magnetic field are related by the equation E = cB, where c is the
speed of light. Hence, this "electromagnetic effect" is definitely
nothing weak or subtle. It is used in motors, for example, that run
everything from simple floor fans to gigantic pumps for municipal water
supplies, as well as many other types of devices.
Atoms
of the metal bar possess gravitational motion and, again, are moving in
all three dimensions of extension space simultaneously. How would an
atom act if one of these dimensions of motions could be cancelled by a
"motion canceller". We can get a clue from the behavior of massless
particles. In contrast to massive
particles, massless particles
lack one dimension of the gravitational motion. They possess only
momentum, not mass. The space/time relationships are shown in the table
below. (The table is copied from the article Energy from
Massless Particles? , which has more information on mass,
inertia, and massless particles).
| Symbol |
Name |
Space/time
dimensions |
C
Factor |
Energy
Term |
| E |
energy |
t/s |
c0 |
E |
| p |
momentum |
t2/s2 |
c1 |
pc |
| m |
mass |
t3/s3 |
c2 |
mc2 |
Whereas massive
particles are moving "anti" to the outward progression of space and
time in three dimensions (t3/s3),
massless particles, like the
neutrino, have this anti-motion only in two
dimensions (t2/s2). This
means that massless particles cannot fully participate in the motion
that is characteristic of a gravitationally bound reference system.
Hence, massless particles will move at the speed of light relative to
such a system. This missing dimension of motion can, of course, have
any orientation relative to the reference system.
Now we begin to see
what might be required of an
antigravity device. Atoms are built from the 4p and 2p intrinsic spins as
explained in The
Atomic Spin System. There is no way to get rid of these
intrinsic spins and still have intact atoms, because the spins are the
source of chemical properties —a defining characteristic of atoms— as
well as the gravitational motion. Instead, the most likely approach
would be to use a "motion canceller" to cancel out one
dimension of the gravitational motion. If this could be done, the
device could be made to move at speeds up to that of light. In essence,
the device would act like a macroscopic analog of a massless particle.
Of course, the influence of the "motion canceller" needs to be fully
controllable.
See also:
"United States gravity control
propulsion research", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_gravity_control_propulsion_initiative
With
these insights, you might want to review the gravity modification
experiments performed a few years ago at Tampere, Finland and more
recently by NASA. Some of many links:
"Finnish
researcher reportedly discovers
gravity-change effect"
http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/INST/nov96/gravity.html
"Superconductive
Components, Inc. awarded phase II
contract by NASA on gravity modification"
http://www.superconductivecomp.com/nasap2award.htm
"Breakthrough
as scientists beat gravity."
http://www.borderlands.de/gravity.finland.php3
"Tampere
Anti-Gravity Report"
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~joi/issue4/ar185.html
And others:
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/physics/0108005
"Impulse Gravity
Generator Based on Charged YBa2Cu3O7-y
Superconductor with Composite Crystal Structure", arXiv:physics/0108005 v2 30 Aug 2001, Evgeny Podkletnov, Giovanni Modanese, (32
pages, 7 figures).
From
the abstract: "An apparatus has been
constructed and tested in which the superconductor is subjected to peak
currents in excess of 104 A, surface potentials
in excess of 1 MV, trapped magnetic field up to 1 T, and temperature
down to 40K." The apparatus produces a "focused beam" which propagates
"without noticeable attenuation through different materials and exerts
a short repulsive force on small movable objects and independent of
their composition. It therefore resembles a gravitational impulse. The
observed phenomenon appears to be absolutely new and unprecedented in
the literature." (p. 1)
From
the article: The repulsive force "on pendulums made of different
materials does not depend on the material but is only proportional to
the mass of the sample. Pendulums of different mass demonstrated equal
deflection at constant voltage. This was proved by a large number of
measurements using spherical samples of different mass and diameter.
The range of the employed test masses was between 10 and 50 grams. . .
. Measurement of the impulse taken at close distance (3-6 m)
from the installation and at the distance of 150 m
gave identical results, within the experimental errors. As these two
points of measurements were separated by a thick brick wall and by air,
it is possible to admit that the gravity impulse was not absorbed by
the media, or the losses were negligible. . . . This work indicates
that a kind of artificial gravity can be generated using the unique
properties of superconducting ceramic materials and a combination of
electric and magnetic forces." (p. 8-9, 27)
References:
http://xxx.lanl.gov/PS_cache/physics/pdf/0108/0108005v2.pdf
(paper)
http://lanl.arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0209/0209051.pdf
(illustrations after references)
Illustrations:
(these links keep changing; you might have to do some Googling):
http://lanl.arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/ps/0108/0108005v2.figure1and2.jpg
(32.3 kB, current as of Sept 2012)
http://lanl.arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/ps/0108/0108005v2.figure3.jpg
(40.0 kB discharge chamber; current as of Sept 2012)
http://lanl.arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/ps/0108/0108005v2.figure5.jpg
(14.0 kB, current as of Sept 2012)
http://lanl.arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/ps/0108/0108005v2.figure4.jpg
(22.4 kB, current as of Sept 2012)
http://lanl.arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/ps/0108/0108005v2.figure6.gif
(5.1 kB, current as of Sept 2012)
http://lanl.arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/ps/0108/0108005v2.figure7.gif
(3418 bytes, current as of Sept 2012)
http://lanl.arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/ps/0108/0108005v2.figure8.gif
(3125 bytes, current as of Sept 2012)
Other
refs:
http://xxx.lanl.gov/PS_cache/physics/pdf/0108/0108005v2.pdf
(paper)
http://lanl.arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0209/0209051.pdf
(illustrations after references)
Interview
Dr. Eugene Podkletnov - Full Length Uncut Fixed (2004) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgyAFElQZcU&feature=related
Similarity
to "dark rays" of Tesla:
Analysis
of
this situation
proved that electrical energy or electrically productive energies were
being projected from the impulse device as rays, not waves. Tesla was
amazed to find these rays absolutely longitudinal in their action
through space, describing them in a patent as “light-like rays”. These
observations conformed with theoretical expectations described in 1854
by Kelvin.
In another article Tesla calls them
“dark-rays”, and “rays which are more light-like in character”. The
rays neither diminished with the inverse square of the distance nor the
inverse of the distance from their source. They seemed to stretch out
in a progressive shock-shell to great distances without any apparent
loss.(
http://journal.borderlands.com/2010/the-broadcast-power-of-nikola-tesla-part-1/
, Gerry
Vassilatos )
See:
Lost
Science, Gerry
Vassilatos, p. 87+ ( http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Aetherforce_Libary/Lost%20Science/Gerry%20Vassilatos%20-Lost-Science-Complete-Edition.pdf
)
The Free
Energy Secrets of Cold
Electricity , Peter A.
Lindemann, D.Sc , http://www.teslasociety.ch/info/NTV_2011/free.pdf
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/0685957.pdf
, http://www.freepatentsonline.com/0685958.pdf
,
https://ia700403.us.archive.org/19/items/CompletePatentsOfNikolaTesla/Complete_Patents_Nikola_Tesla.pdf
( http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6417597.pdf
"Gravitational wave generator" , Robert M. L. Baker, July 9,
2002)
Note:
The terminolgy use to describe these effects is misleading. A "gravity
wave" is neither longitudinal nor transverse in character. It
is
not a wave either. It is a mechanical effect ("pressure wave") that is
instantaneous and not propagated (i.e.,a "non-local" effect).
The
beam is formed by the geometry of the generating device and is not
diffraction limited in the manner of light waves.
Antigravity
Replication Experiments:
http://www.amasci.com/freenrg/tamp.txt
Tampere Replication -- How to
http://www.gravity-society.org/exp.htm
"Demonstration of transient weak gravitational shielding by a YBCO
LEVHEX at the superconducting transition", John
Schnurer
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/WO1998023976A2.pdf
"Improved apparatus and method for gravitational
modification", John Schnurer
http://www.amasci.com/freenrg/bw.txt
BUSINESS WEEK ONLINE NEWS FLASH! September
25, 1996
ONE STEP CLOSER TO AN ANTIGRAVITY MACHINE
http://www.gravity-society.org/phc.txt
A possibility of gravitational force shielding by bulk YBa2Cu3O7-x
superconductor", E. Podkletnov and R. Nieminen
http://www.gravity-society.org/msu.htm
"Weak gravitation shielding properties of composite bulk YBa2Cu3O7-x
superconductor below 70 K under e.m. field", E. Podkletnov
http://www.allbusiness.com/energy-utilities/utilities-industry-electric-power/5518389-1.html
"A theory of the Podkletnov effect based on general relativity:
anti-gravity force due to the perturbed non-holonomic background of
space", by Rabounski, Dmitri,Borissova, Larissa; Progress in Physics,
July 1 2007
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/71619295/803-page-Collection-of-Papers-on-Anti-Gravity-Research
"803-page Collection of Papers on Anti-Gravity Research "
Other
Antigravity Patent claims:
Technical
and Theoretical Specifications for Warp Drive Technology
Andrew Peter Worsley, Peter John Twist, June 19, 2003
http://l2.espacenet.com/espacenet/viewer?PN=US2003114313&CY=ep&LG=en&DB=EPD
http://l2.espacenet.com/espacenet/bnsviewer?CY=ep&LG=en&DB=EPD&PN=US2003114313&ID=US2003114313A1+I+
(http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html
) United States patent database
(http://ep.espacenet.com/espacenet/ep/en/e_net.htm http://worldwide.espacenet.com/
) European patent database
(http://www.freepatentsonline.com
) James Ryley's site
(Some
words of caution: a patent attorney once told me that devices do not
actually have to work to be granted a patent. Patents can be granted on
"plausibility" without an actual demonstration of a working device.
Also, many offbeat technology patents seem to have a lot of highly
technical circumlocution and obfuscatory nonsense in their "Theory of
Operation" section. Apparently, this is just fluff to impress patent
examiners or investors. Some of these patents clearly merit skepticism.)
http://www.rexresearch.com/hooper/3610971.htm
"All-Electric
Motional Field Generator", William J. Hooper
__________
A
relevant fact is that atomic spin coordination is possible in
high-temperature superconductors:
"Many atoms have a magnetic property called spin,
which makes them behave as tiny bar magnets. Scientists noticed in
experiments even 10 years ago that at a temperature just below the
superconductivity threshold, the spins of many atoms in some copper
oxide compounds fluctuated in a coordinated manner. . . Now "it's
pretty much been proven that the [spin coordination] is present for all
high-temperature superconductors," comments Andrey V. Chubukno of the
University of Wisconsin-Madison" —Science News, March 16, 2002, Vol 161, No 11, p.
173-174.
( http://www.sciencenews.org
) (See also "The Wallace
inventions, spin aligned nuclei, the gravitomagnetic field, and the
Tampere experiment: is there a connection?" by Robert Stirniman " http://www.rexresearch.com/wallace/wallaceinventions.pdf
)
"Secret of
superconductivity in sight" 24 January
2002 http://physicsweb.org/article/news/6/1/16
How
high is
high-temperature?
"Currently,
the superconductor with the highest critical temperature ever recorded
is Mercury Barium Thallium Copper Oxide or Hg0.2Tl0.8Ca2Cu3O, which has
a critical temperature of 139 K at one atmosphere. This superconductor
is a type of ceramic copper oxide and its critical temperature was
determined in 1995 by Chakoumakos, Dai, Wong, Sun, Lu, and Xin.
Apparently, metal-copper oxide ceramic superconductors have high
critical temperatures, which might unlock the key of synthesizing a
high temperature superconductor that is superconductive under room
temperature conditions." http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2002/MichaelNg.shtml
"Piezoelectricity-Induced Room Temperature Superconductor", Salvatore Cezar Pais, https://techlinkcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/RTSC.pdf (application US 2019/0058105 A1)
Some superconductors
are very sensitive to
processing parameters, such as heating and cooling rates:
"The
recent discovery of superconductivity at temperatures up to 125 K has
led to unprecedented worldwide research efforts to understand
mechanisms and properties so that these materials can be utilized
advantageously for energy conservation in applications such as
electrical energy transmission and storage, transportation, and
electronics. One family of these materials, containing Bi, Sr, Ca, Cu,
and O, is very sensitive to the temperature of heating and the rate of
cooling during processing. A wide range of properties is possible,
depending on these parameters. This sensitivity to heating temperature
and cooling rate suggested an investigation in the PSU ballistic
compressor to determine the effects of rapid heating and cooling on the
properties of these materials." http://physics.pdx.edu/faculty_files/das/dash.htm
See
also "Enhancement of To of Bi-Sr-Ca-Cu-O Superconductor by Rapid
Heating and Cooling in a Ballistic Compressor" Q. Duan, J. Dash, M.
Takeo, and J. Huang, J. Appl. Physics, 69, 4897 (15 April 1991); http://physics.pdx.edu/faculty_files/tak/takeo.htm
; pulsed power might be useful extremely fast heating/cooling http://pps.coe.kumamoto-u.ac.jp/streaming/PulsedPower/RAM/bluhm/pplesson3.ram
Clearly
the design of
such a "motion canceller" would be facilitated by a factual model of
the atom (one based on intrinsic spin systems), and by a re-write of
all physical equations in terms of space/time (or time/space)
ratios. Such an approach will surely lead to powerful and
general solutions to perplexing problems in physics. The biggest
obstacle by far however, will be in overcoming our own preconceived
ideas and misconceptions about how the Universe actually works.
"The
problem of creating something which is new, but which is consistent
with everything which has been seen before, is one of extreme
difficulty. "
(The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Vol. II, p.
20-10 to 2011)
__________
6-14-03 Update:
Some additional articles have appeared on this subject: recently:
"Podkletnov
maintains that a laboratory installation in Russia has already
demonstrated the 4in (10cm) wide beam's ability to repel objects a
kilometre away and that it exhibits negligible power loss at distances
of up to 200km. Such a device, observers say, could be
adapted for use as an anti-satellite weapon or a ballistic missile
shield." ( Jane's Defence Weekly 29 July 2002, Anti-gravity
propulsion comes 'out of the closet', By Nick Cook, JDW Aerospace
Consultant, London) See http://www.gravity-society.org/
The following two
citations are from "Investigation
of high voltage discharges in low pressure gases through large ceramic
superconducting electrodes" ( Evgeny Podkletnov, Giovanni Modanese, 26
Apr 2003 (final version), http://www.arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0209051
)
"The propagation
velocity of the radiation is still
unknown, too. This can be measured in principle by placing two
identical detectors A and B along the beam, at a known distance from
each other (for instance, the maximum observed distance, AB=150 m). If
the beam propagates with the speed of light, then the detection delay
will be of the order of 10-6 s. This can be
observed by comparing the signals of the two detectors as seen at the
middle point between A and B. Then for a check one can exchange A with
B. The method requires that the detectors have a temporal resolution
better than 10-6 s. In general, it is
difficult to obtain fast rise times in detectors based on mechanical
transducers." (Section 5)
"The
repulsive character of the force is not explainable in the classical
gravitational theory, either." (Section 4.2)
3-30-11 Update: ( source: Secrets
of Antigravity Propulsion, Paul A. LaViolette, 2008, p.
175-178)
". . . at a
higher discharge voltage, of
around 10 million volts, the gravity wave pulse became so strong that
it was able to substantially dent a 1-inch thick steel plate and punch
a 4-inch diameter hole through a concrete block! . . . Podkletnov also
disclosed that his improved pulse generator exhibited increased thrust
power even when energized with 5 million-volt pulses. Also, he noted
that these powerful pulses would sometimes bend the generator's copper
anode as well as damage the walls of the discharge chamber. . .
.
Podkletnov's team
measured a far higher velocity
for the concrete-smashing gravity impulses produced by their improved
Marx bank pulse generator. Using a pair of synchronized atomic clocks
to measure the arrival time of the impulses at separate locations, they
were able to determine that the impulses were traveling at least
several thousand times the speed of light, perhaps faster!"
(For more about the
possible physics behind this,
see my
(flawed but corrected) comment about the second time
derivative of the E field. See also Water Capacitors-Electrical
.)
If
the Podkletnov gravitational impulse device operates on the motion
canceller principle, the "beam" propagation velocity should be
infinite. In other words, the effect is instantaneous. Nothing is
propagated, for reasons previously outlined in the 8-10-02 Note above in
the Shapiro Time Delay article and elsewhere.
The effect is repulsive because the "towards" motion of gravity is
cancelled in one dimension between the two participating objects. These
objects no longer (fully) participate in the motions of a
gravitationally bound reference system and are not coming together at
the same rate in all dimensions. The effect will look like "repulsion"
in the context of a laboratory reference system.
There
are also some more clues about the occupant acceleration problem noted previously
:
"Because
the impulse gravity beam penetrates bulk
material and seems to act independently of target composition, it will
uniformly accelerate all spacecraft components in the beam path. Even
at high accelerations, the spacecraft components would not experience
any internal stresses; a spacecraft being propelled by an impulse
gravity beam would behave as though it were in freefall. Uniform
acceleration of all spacecraft components means that even delicate
payloads might safely undergo very high accelerations." (EVALUATION OF AN IMPULSE GRAVITY GENERATOR BASED
BEAMED PROPULSION CONCEPT, Chris Y. Taylor, Giovanni Modanese, page 5;
presented 7-10 Jul 2002; Published by the American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., 2002. See http://www.arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0209023 )
At
this point, the
indications are that spacecraft speeds up to that of light appear to be
technically feasible and practical (but not as currently envisioned as
"beamed propulsion"). Speeds greater than light do not appear to be
forbidden, but such speeds would be temporal, rather than spatial.
However, that might prove to be an advantage. The
"inverseness" of space/time ratios implies that locations which are
widely separated in three-dimensional space are comparatively close in
three-dimensional time. The operational equivalent of the science
fiction "warp drives" might prove to be possible after all. (See also
the diagram, Speeds
in a Gravitationally Bound Reference System and its
discussion. Another aspect of this is that the speed of electric,
magnetic, and gravitational fields are instantaneous, i.e., far in
excess of the speed of light (See Speed of Gravity, Speed
of Electric Fields ). This implies that
propulsion "speeds" effectively far greater than light speed can be
produced. The effects would not conform to Special Relativity, however,
as temporal speeds do not have a spatial trajectory, and involve "the
physics of non-locality". This could produce delocalization of the
affected object (i.e., it may disappear from view, become intermingled
with other matter, etc. even though it remains in the very same spatial
location.)
(A
clarification about Reactionless Propulsion: The beamed propulsion
concept requires an Earth based generator to transmit the beam to the
spacecraft and push it along. The craft could be just an ordinary
spacecraft, or even a chunk of rock. Although this scheme has some
applications, I don't believe it is practical and safe for space flight
in general. But there is an alternative: mount the generator
on the spacecraft. It would at first seem that there is no
point in mounting such a generator on a spacecraft because the beam
generating apparatus produces no Newtonian back reaction. A beam
projected from the rear of the craft would NOT produce any forward
thrust on the spacecraft. But the fallacy here is that of Newtonian
thinking. The beam is NOT like rocket exhaust. In order for it to
produce a thrust on the spacecraft, the generator would have to be
mounted at the rear, and the beam projected forward
into the spacecraft itself. This would push all components/occupants of
the spacecraft forward and drag the attached
beam generator along with it. This is the literal equivalent of a
person 'picking himself up by his own bootstraps' to leap a tall
building. It is physically impossible using Newtonian action/reaction
mechanics. But in the Motion Canceller concept, the reaction
is perpendicular to the beam (in all radial directions) and cancels
itself out within the generator). See my comment about reactionless force and railgun recoil. This also
implies that the best shape for such a spacecraft would be something
having radial symmetry, like a saucer or a cigar. This facilitates
keeping the entire craft, and its occupants, within the boundaries of
the beam.)
Can
mechanical
structures handle internal high g acceleration? Here is a partial table
from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-force
| Shock
capability of mechanical wrist watches[25] |
> 5,000 g |
| V8 Formula
One engine, maximum piston acceleration [26] |
8,600 g |
| Rating
of electronics built into military artillery shells[27] |
15,500 g |
With
a superconducting emitter, the beam effect is uniform across the face
of the emitter. Are superconductors therefore required? I don't have
enough information to answer this question. The beam could be
approximately uniform across the face of a non-superconductor
provided a fast pulsed voltage is used.
Here is a slide from Pulsed Power Engineering,
2011, Prof. Sunao Katsuki lecture series Introduction, page
14:
http://www.eecs.kumamoto-u.ac.jp/~katsuki/lectures/pp_eng/no1.pdf
"Each spark gap has a
variance of its breakdown
voltage, which can be characterised by the standard deviation sa(U).
. . . Therefore, to achieve the largest possible number of channels, we
must reduce sa(U)
and decrease the pulse rise time dU/dt
as much as possible." (Pulsed Power Systems,
Hansjoachim Blum (2006) p. 95)
Can this be done by
hobbyists? Yes:
"The
idea of making electrodes parallel enough to discharge along their
entire length is intimidating especially if you have ever tried to do
this along a very long spark gap. Under normal conditions it is perhaps
impossible to get a spark jumping across a long narrow pair of
electrodes, to cover their entire length. You will always get a tiny
bright spark at one place at a time. This was one of the reasons the
TEA laser before building one, seemed intimidating.
As
it turns out in the case of TEA [Transversely Excited Atmospheric
pressure ] lasers, the extremely fast voltage transition between the
electrodes creates a discharge across their entire length. Adjustment
for this condition is relatively easy. " ("Simple Homemade
T.E.A. Laser", Nyle Steiner, K7NS (Oct 2007) http://www.sparkbangbuzz.com/tealaser/tealaser7.htm
; also "Nitrogen
Laser Considerations for the DIYer, With a View Toward the
Design
and Construction of a High-Performance DIY Laser" http://www.jonsinger.org/jossresearch/tjiirrs/005.html
Higher
energy
density, as
well as beam uniformity, can be delivered with pulsed power because of
a multiple channel effect. However, the anitgravity effect may still
depend on the spin coordination that is possible in high-temperature
superconductors. But an interview with Dr. Eugene
Podkletnov beginning at the 21:10 point (and 48:17) suggests
alternatives to superconductors. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgyAFElQZcU&feature=related
“But
to be absolutely honest now, after twelve or fifteen, already, years of
research in this field, we came to the conclusion that it is not
necessary to use superconducting materials in order to modify the
gravity field. We can use rotating magnetic fields, and we can turn to
normal conductors, which is much easier, much easier, and uh, ah, this
method has a lot of advantages.”
http://portal.groupkos.com/index.php?title=Eugene_Podkletnov_portal And
there may even be still other schemes. See "Van de Graaff Generator
Effect-Force Concentration", Charles R. Morton http://amasci.com/freenrg/morton1.html
. This scheme does not use high temperature superconductors and seems
to resemble the Biefeld-Brown
effect more so than the Podkletnov effect. Note
that both use (or can use) pulsed high voltage electric fields. The
Frolov "T-Hat capacitor" also seems related to the Morton effect,
although it uses static fields. ("Propulsion unit using asymmetrical
(gradient) electric capacitors", Alexander V. Frolov, http://www.faraday.ru/t-cap.html
; compare with Brown's patent http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3187206.pdf
) These effects need to be investigated at much higher power levels.
Morton's Van de Graaff Generator Effect
Brown's Electrokenetic Apparatus
http://amasci.com/freenrg/morton1.html
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3187206.pdf
Incidentally, Morton
describes what could
be a radial reaction force (as
above) to a longitudinal pulse force:
"The spark fired
through a glass tube toward a
metal plate with a hole in it. From the tube came a beam of energy
unlike anything I had ever heard of. . . . unlike the VandeGraaff
explosion, this beam of force passed through metals. . . . the force
was so powerful that it sent bits of paper flying.
As the years passed,
I developed better and better
methods of producing the beam. Then one day it happened - instead of
repelling matter, the beam attracted matter. Even radiation pressure
could not explain this phenomena. . . . When the spark went through the
glass tube, the air collapsed around it".
http://amasci.com/freenrg/morton1.html
Morton's description
is lacking in detail and I
simply don't know what to think of it. Perhaps my readers could try
this simple experiment and offer some feedback. Likewise for the
experiments of Martin N. Kaplan. See also the forum
discussions: http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/browse_frm/thread/25991020eef22a11.
. .
http://amasci.com/freenrg/mort2.txt
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/forcefieldpropulsionphysics/conversations/topics/1027?var=1
http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/forcefieldpropulsionphysics/conversations/topics/1403
http://www.esotericscience.com/Magnetism.aspx
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/physics/9906059
Propulsion
Through Electromagnetic Self-Sustained
Acceleration
Authors: Vesselin Petkov
(Submitted on 29 Jun 1999 (v1), last revised 9 Jul 1999 (this version,
v4))
Abstract:
As is known the repulsion of the volume
elements
of an uniformly accelerating charge or a charge supported in an uniform
gravitational field accounts for the electromagnetic contribution to
the charge's inertial and gravitational mass, respectively. This means
that the mutual repulsion of the volume elements of the charge produces
the resistance to its accelerated motion. Conversely, the effect of
electromagnetic attraction of opposite charges enhances the accelerated
motion of the charges provided that they have been initially uniformly
accelerated or supported in an uniform gravitational field. The
significance of this effect is that it constitutes a possibility of
altering inertia and gravitation.
This
vague situation suggests another
somewhat more difficult experiment. I call it a "gravitational pulse
tube". I have no idea if it will work. (see math
error note ) The discharge pulse must be unidirectional (no
"ringing" or current reversals). The basic scheme is as shown:
If someone
is experimenting
with such a device, I doubt if the effects would be recognized as
coming from such a source: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cause-of-mystery-beach-blast-in-rhode-island-solved/
(read the comments) See also shockwave-thru-a-coin experiment
(LIFE
Nov 23, 1942 p. 132 ).
Another
device, a vircator,
is used to generate microwave pulses in the gigawatt to terawatt range.
It has superficial similarities to the Morton device, except it uses an
evacuated waveguide (instead of an atmospheric pressure dielectric
tube) and an axial magnetic field. The Marx bank is the equivalent of a
powerful Van de Graaff generator. Hobbyists need to be careful not to
generate intense microwave pulses (or X-rays) when creating design
variations intended to explore the Morton effect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vircator
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4345220.pdf
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4730170.pdf
"The
monotron as a gridded microwave
tube", Joaquim J. Barroso (2003) http://www.plasma.inpe.br/LAP_Publicacoes/LAP2003/JJBarroso_Poster_LAWPP2003b.pdf
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3339149.pdf
Crossed-Field
Amplifier:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossed-field_amplifier
http://www.radartutorial.eu/08.transmitters/Crossed-Field%20Amplifier%20(Amplitron).en.html
http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/media/31069/CohenRadarTxOverviewISART2011.pdf
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/627469.pdf
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4376908.pdf
See also: George
Samuel Piggott's Electro-Gravitation experiments
Anyway, more about
Podkletnov:
"Breaking the Law of
Gravity" by Charles Platt (Mar
1998)
http://www.americanantigravity.com/podkletnov.html
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/6.03/antigravity_pr.html
__________
Some
NASA related
links are listed below (try rating my website with the criteria in the
first citation below):
Millis,
M., "NASA Breakthrough
Propulsion Physics Program", NASA/TM-1998-208400, (June 98) (9 pg.). http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/bpp/TM-1998-208400.htm
Millis,
Marc G.
"Challenge to Create the Space Drive," In Journal of Propulsion and
Power (AIAA), Vol. 13, No. 5, pp. 577-682, (Sept.-Oct. 1997). http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/bpp/TM-107289.htm
Millis
and Williamson,
ed., "NASA Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Workshop
Proceedings,"NASA/CP-1999-208694, Proceedings of a conference held at
and sponsored by NASA Lewis Research Center in Cleveland Ohio, August
12-14, 1997. (Jan. 99) (456 pg.). **NOTE** A condensed, 10-page summary
of this workshop is available as: Millis, M. "Breakthrough Propulsion
Physics Workshop Preliminary Results," NASA TM-97-206241 (Nov. 97). http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/bpp/TM-97-206241.htm
Advanced
Space
Transportation Program http://sli.nasa.gov/ast/astp.html
"To
find out more about
BPP's challenges and new concepts, check out "Warp Drive, When?" http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/PAO/warp.htm
"
"To
stay aware of any
further developments or emerging opportunities associated with the BPP
Project, please revisit the Project web site from time to time http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/bpp/
"
You
can also access the
NASA WWW and do a word search on your topic of choice. The "Search"
capability of "Space Link" may provide you a wealth of
information. http://www.grc.nasa.gov/Doc/search.htm
NASA
funding mechanisms
have had breakthrough propulsion added to their solicitation topics. If
you are doing work in this field, you might want to investigate the
funding opportunities. See http://sbir.gsfc.nasa.gov/
"Responsive Coverage
Using Propellantless
Satellites", George E. Pollock, Joseph W. Gangestad, James M. Longuski,
http://www.responsivespace.com/Papers/RS6/SESSIONS/SESSION%20II/2002_POLLOCK/2002P.pdf
(this has nothing to do with antigravity, but is interesting
in its own right) Also: "New Synchronous Orbits Using the
Geomagnetic Lorentz Force", Brett Streetman, Mason A. Peck (2007)
http://www.spacecraftresearch.com/files/StreetmanPeck_JGCD2007.pdf
Some interesting
links about space and time:
Luxon Hypothesis: "H.
Zeigler proposed in 1909 that
relativity phenomena would be a natural result if the most elemental
particles of mass were made of smaller particles that all moved at the
constant speed of light." http://www.tardyon.de/other.htm
The Reciprocal
System, http://www.rsystem.org
The Collected works of Dewey B. Larson, http://www.rsystem.org/dbl/index.htm
http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~phys16/Textbook/
This is a textbook by David Morin that has "grown out of the
first-semester honors freshman physics course that has been taught at
Harvard University during recent years." It is quite good. Chapter 5 is
about "The Lagrangian Method" which is very useful, general, and
powerful in both classical mechanics and quantum mechanics. Chapters
10,11,12, and 13 are about Relativity. I especially agree with the
author's approach to teaching:
"One thing many
people don’t realize is that you
need to know more than the correct way(s) to do a problem; you also
need to be familiar with many incorrect ways of
doing it. Otherwise, when you come upon a new problem, there may be a
number of decent-looking approaches to take, and you won’t be able to
immediately weed out the poor ones. Struggling a bit with a problem
invariably leads you down some wrong paths, and this is an essential
part of learning. To understand something, you not only have to know
what’s right about the right things; you also have to know what’s wrong
about the wrong things. Learning takes a serious amount of effort, many
wrong turns, and a lot of sweat. Alas, there are no short-cuts to
understanding physics." —David Morin
"It
is He who reveals the
profound and hidden things."
—Daniel
2:22
html 3/02g
The
Biefeld-Brown Effect
Update
4-27-11 on the Biefeld-Brown effect:
Please review
physicist Feynman's
remarks about a
charging capacitor before reading this section.
In popular
practice, there appear to be two
technical embodiments of the Biefeld-Brown effect: electrokinetics and
electrogravitics. The former develops thrust from an electrostatic ion
wind effect generated by a high voltage source (tens of kilovolts or
higher). These are the “lifters” you see demonstrated on the internet.
They are low mass devices and will not work in a vacuum but are capable
of lifting their own weight.
The other
type
generates thrust by using asymmetric electrical fields, combined with
high mass, high K asymmetric capacitors. This type of device will
produce thrust in a high vacuum (10-6 Torr
), or when the electrodes are enclosed in Plexiglas shields (or plastic
bags) to contain the ion wind or when immersed in transformer oil to
suppress corona and ion wind effects. Operation is more efficient
without corona leakage, and higher voltages are also possible (the
thrust effect scales approximately as the square or cube of the
voltage). Cone shaped dielectrics work better than cylindrical
dielectrics. High K, high mass dielectrics (like barium titanate) work
better than, say, glass or polyethylene. Capacitors with a symmetric
construction produce no thrust. High voltages (50-100 kV ) are required
to produce moderate thrust. The thrust is towards the larger, (usually
positive) electrode; during spark discharges, thrust appears to be
independent of electrode geometry or polarity. Pulsed DC, DC with an AC
waveform imposed, or even AC itself, works better than
constant polarity DC. Thrust characteristics may depend on
electrical waveform asymmetry. There is general suspicion in aviation
circles that the B2 bomber (United States) operates on these
principles. (See Brown’s patent, Electrokinetic apparatus (1965-06-01) http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3187206.pdf
)
(An
AC waveform imposed on a high DC voltage reminds me of the so-called
Hutchinson effect, which seems to be present in some form when some
sort of a combination of a Tesla coil (AC) is energized in
the presence of a strong DC potential (100kV or more) say from a Van de
Graaff generator. I played with both of these as a kid, though not at
the same time. All these technologies are potentially world
changing, and ones that every Tom, Dick, and Harry has access to—for
better or for worse. So pay attention here . . . )
These two
effects
are different and are often confused. A study sponsored by NASA is an
example:
This
paper reports on the results of tests of several Asymmetrical Capacitor
Thrusters (ACTs). . . .The model assumed the thrust was due to
electrostatic forces on the leakage current flowing across the
capacitor. It was further assumed that this current involves charged
ions which undergo multiple collisions with air. These collisions
transfer momentum. All of the measured data was consistent with this
model. Many configurations were tested, and the results suggest general
design principles for ACTs to be used for a variety of purposes. (“Asymmetrical Capacitors for
Propulsion”, Francis
X. Canning, Cory Melcher, and Edwin Winet, Institute
for Scientific Research, Inc., Fairmont, West Virginia, 2004; http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/reports/2004/CR-2004-213312.pdf
)
Their use
of the
term “Asymmetrical Capacitor Thrusters” not withstanding, what was
tested here was clearly an ion wind effect. Contrast this study with
Brown's comments in his article "How I Control Gravitation" , T.T.
Brown , Science & Invention (August 1929):
Since
the time of the first test the apparatus and the methods used have been
greatly improved and simplified. Cellular "gravitators" have taken the
place of the large balls of lead. Rotating frames supporting two and
four gravitators have made possible acceleration measurements.
Molecular gravitators made of solid blocks of massive dielectric have
given still greater efficiency. Rotors and pendulums operating under
oil have eliminated atmospheric considerations as to pressure,
temperature and humidity. The disturbing effects of ionization,
electron emission and pure electro-statics have likewise been carefully
analyzed and eliminated. . . .
Let
us take, for example, the case of a gravitator totally immersed in oil
but suspended so as to act as a pendulum and swing along the line of
its elements. When the direct current with high voltage (75-300
kilovolts) is applied the gravitator swings up the arc until its
propulsive force balances the force of the earth's gravity resolved to
that point, then it stops, but it does not remain there. The pendulum
then gradually returns to the vertical or starting position even while
the potential is maintained. The pendulum swings only to one side of
the vertical. Less than five seconds is required for the test pendulum
to reach the maximum amplitude of the swing but from thirty to eighty
seconds are required for it to return to zero. . . .
MASS
of the dielectric is a factor in determining the total energy involved
in the impulse. For a given amplitude an increase in mass is productive
of an increase in the energy exhibited by the system (E = mg).
In
particular, note
the reference to "totally immersed in oil", and "solid blocks of
massive dielectric" and the use of lead
sheets, and the momentary (not continuous) impulse, in
Brown's cellular type of thruster. This is clearly NOT a device that
depends on "charged ions which undergo multiple collisions with air"
(NASA). Brown's 300311 patent also states that "said linear
force or motion is furthermore believed to have no equal and opposite
reaction that can be observed by any method commonly known and accepted
by the physical science to date" (page 1, line 24) and "This motion
seems to possess no equal or opposite motion that is detectable by the
present day mechanics" (page 2, line 63; (see discussion above)).
This is in contrast to the NASA document which states "These collisions
transfer momentum." It is very clear that the NASA study investigates a
completely different device and a completely different effect.
Others
have
recognized this too:
The
"Biefeld-Brown Effect," sometimes referred to as the "Townsend Brown
Effect," is frequently erronously associated with ionic wind "lifters,"
. . . . The pure Biefeld-Brown Effect does not incorporate an ionic
wind component. ("Stress in Dielectrics (Biefeld-Brown
Effect)", http://www.qualight.com/portal.htm/brown/
)
The
Wikipedia
article on the Biefeld–Brown effect seems to add to the
confusion: "This creates a high field gradient around the
smaller, positively charged electrode." But in Brown's patents, the
positive electrode is actually the larger one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biefeld%E2%80%93Brown_effect
(accessed 4-4-11) , http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3187206.pdf
Another
problem is spelled out in the Wikipedia article:
Critics and supporters alike have called
throughout the years for vacuum experiments, in order to eliminate ion
wind contributions from the devices. While there have been a handful of
such experiments, most notably the efforts of Dr. R.L. Talley in the
late 1980s and early 1990s, there is still a great deal of discrepancy
over whether the effect is directly related to gravity or not,[citation needed]
mainly because it isn't predicted by conventional electrostatics
or general
relativity.[citation needed][3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biefeld%E2%80%93Brown_effect)
The effect
is not predicted by
conventional physics. It is therefore easy to write it off as more
“internet mythology” and “crazy patents” by delusional people and
"air-head techno babblers" (of which there are many). Additionally,
these topics are often mixed in with other "stuff" about UFOs,
extraterrestrials, pyschic phenomena, teleportation, and so forth. The
physical theories offered might not use your favorite terminology, and
some words, like "ether" and "gravitational radiation" may raise red
flags. Scientists
would likely conclude that investigating this effect, and others like
it, is probably a waste of time and money. This simply shows
how hard it is for an idea that has no peers to get “peer reviewed”.
Public investigation/implementation of the effect has been left to
hobbyists and inventors.
Another effect noted
by Brown (above) and Piggott (elsewhere):
Less
than five seconds is required for
the test pendulum to reach the maximum amplitude of the swing but from
thirty to eighty seconds are required for it to return to zero. . . .
The possibility that
this has something to do with
spin relaxation times should be investigated:
"an atom
can retain a particular
spin polarization for a substantial amount of time. The "relaxation
times" of spin polarized atoms are affected by the environment. "If the
inside walls of the cell are suitably coated, collisions with the walls
have little effect on the spin state of the atoms. . . . For example,
for hydrogen atoms bouncing off teflon walls, tens of thousands of
collisions are required for the magnetic moment of the hydrogen atom to
become disoriented." (Quantum Mechanics,
C.Cohen-Tannoudji, et al., 1977, p.
452) See comment about spin
relaxation time and Gravomechanical
effect.
See also: Guidelines
to Antigravity, Robert L.
Forward, American Journal of Physics, Vol. 31,
No. 3, 166-170, March, 1963. Abstract::
"This paper
emphasizes certain little known aspects
of Einstein's general theory of relativity. Although these features are
of minor theoretical importance, their understanding and use can lead
to the generation and control of gravitational forces. Three distinctly
different non-Newtonian gravitational forces are described. The
research areas which might lead to methods for the control of
gravitation are pointed out and guidelines for initial investigation
into these areas are given." http://u2.lege.net/culture.zapto.org_82_20080124/antigravidity/Robert%20L.Forward%20-%20Guidelines%20to%20Antigravity.pdf
I should add that
while this research has mostly an
aerospace focus, there may be more down-to-earth and immediate
applications as well. If electroaerodynamics
can reduce drag, or if a hundred pounds of barium
titanate and a few hundred kilovolts can produce significant
thrust, this technology could be used to increase
gas mileage for automobiles, or reduce fuel expenses on long-distance
trucking (or used as a manuevering engine inside a ship). The
requirements in these applications would be much more easily met than
those in aerospace applications, and could be demonstrated by almost
any advanced electronics hobbyist. (For some ideas, see http://www.amazing1.com/hv-dc-power-supplies.htm
)
_____
And
now for a quiz. WHAT are THESE things? Are the photos real or fake?
There were several witnesses ( http://www.ufocasebook.com/bestufopictures10.html
) A few examples:
"California
UFO Drone Analysis of the
Center Hub Structure"
http://www.kbvp.com/taxonomy/term/113
http://www.kbvp.com/ufo-drone-analysis
These
photos are of interest because IF they depict an
actual device, they offer significant clues about how field levitation
might be achieved. The "stave" configuration seems consistent with the
use of pulsed monopolar high voltage electric fields with asymmetric
time derivatives, and with possibly electrically phased rotation of
such fields. This brings to mind the Poynting vector,
curl and asymmetric momentum density relations (Ń´E = - ¶B/¶t
and Ń´B
= J/e0c2
+ 1/c2(¶E/¶t) ), and historical reports of
electrogravity effects. The big rings might imply the use of
magnetic fields (possibly several, and possibly also phased).
Update 9-18-19: One series of photos suggestive of radially pulsed UFO propulsion can be found at:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seJSm-vD9OA&feature=youtu.be&t=2060 (33:36)
Before viewing this, click the YouTube Settings icon (gear) and change the playback speed to 0.25.
This looks like propulsion based on pulsed capacitive discharge. Compare: "Capacitive-discharge electromagnetic propulsion system" http://www.freepatentsonline.com/10135323.html Another
possibility would be the use of bipolar electric
fields,
such as the kind produced by a bipolar Tesla coil. A minimal
configuration would consist of two such coils and two pairs of
electrodes (one pair for each coil). These coils produce very
high voltages that are generated by tuned resonances (and not so much
by
"winding turns ratio" as in conventional transformers). Each electrode
in a pair is mounted at opposite ends of a diameter, and the two
diameters are perpendicular to each other. The coils produce
intermittent "damped ringing wave forms" which fade out after dozens of
cycles. The frequencies are usually in
the range of tens to hundreds of kHz. The coils are "switched" by spark
gaps, which introduces a lot of timing jitter. Phasing can still be
done by using the techniques of early radio (prior to the use of the
vacuum tube), or by letting the configuration do whatever it will do.
The likely result will be high voltage rotating chaotic electric
fields
(which could produce a variety unexpected physical effects,
as
well as protests by angry neighbors over EMI). See LissajousPatterns
for more about phased fields.
This
scheme is similar to that used in ordinary single-phase
induction motors for produce a rotating magnetic
field. The input power is a single source of ordinary sine
wave
electrical power, usually a wall outlet. The main winding uses this
power directly, but the start winding uses a capacitor to
shift
the phase of this same power by approximately 90 electrical degrees.
The windings (poles) are physically mounted internally so
that
they are perpendicular to each other. This combination produces a
rotating magnetic field. After the armature begins rotating
sufficiently, the start winding is no longer needed and is disconnected
by a centrifugal switch.
http://www.electrical-knowhow.com/2012/05/classification-of-electric-motors-part_17.html
Update 7-17-2017:
Can a similar scheme be used to create rotating electrical fields (instead of
rotating magnetic fields)? At first I
thought it could be. How convenient it would be to get the
required phase shift of voltages
with nothing more than a high voltage capacitor! Alas, things are
probably not so simple. In the motor example, the capacitor
shifts one of the currents out of phase with the voltage. The two
magnetic fields thus created by the different currents
are out of phase by the required 90 degrees. This scheme
however,
probably does not shift the phase of the voltages. Hence, it won't work
to produce high voltage, phase-shifted electrical fields.
What
is apparently needed is a quarter-wave transmission line.
One pair
of electrodes is fed directly by a Tesla coil, and the other pair is
fed from the same source but through the transmission line, which has a
length that delays the phase by 90 electrical degrees relative to the
first pair. The result would be a rotating electrical field that should
be easy to characterize, and therefore be reproducable by other
investigators.
| But
there are a couple of serious problems. At the frequencies used,
the line length would be roughly a half-kilometer. And if made from
coax, it would have to be rated for at least 100,000 volts.
Such
transmission lines do exist, but clearly this is not practical for the
Do-It-Yourselfer. |
|
A type of transmission line called a cage line,
used for high power, low frequency applications. It functions similarly
to a large coaxial cable. This example is the antenna feedline for a
longwave radio transmitter in Poland, which operates at a frequency of
225 kHz and a power of 1200 kW.
|
It
is probably possible to get the same effect from a combination of
discrete capacitors and inductors configured to simulate a transmission
line. But there are problems with that too.
And so
the use of
two Tesla coils will probably be the most practical implementation, at
least for proof-of-concept purposes.
Such fields have no known
accepted, practical use, and nobody wastes their time and
resources building such equipment. Here, the
purpose would
be for investigating antigravity, interatomic bonding, (especially in
metals), alteration of radioactive decay rates, and some currently very
obscure effects associated with neutrinos. This
technology is easily accessible to the hobbyist. and there are myriads
of Tesla coil designs and projects on the Internet. These are
used mostly to entertain friends with displays of spectacular
electrical sparks. My hope is that this adult version of kids playing
with matches can be converted to useful technologies.
See also "California Drones" (aka "Dragon-fly drone"*) http://droneteam.com/mediawiki/index.php/Chad_details
;
http://www.dronehoax.com/drone_history/isaac_documentation.htm
(more pictures, statements about the language)
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_flyingobjects11.htm
(separate photos)
https://www.google.com/search?q=palo+alto+caret+laboratory
https://www.google.com/search?q=katakana+font
http://screenrant.com/sarah-connor-chronicles-california-drones-mystery-brusimm-4647/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehxixQxVxg8
http://www.theoutpostforum.com/tof/showthread.php?831-California-type-drone-seen-in-germany
http://droneteam.com/history/yosemite/
http://strangetimesusa.blogspot.com/2012/02/ufo-or-military-drones-faa-clears.html#!/2012/02/ufo-or-military-drones-faa-clears.html
http://truthfall.com/weird-dragonfly-aerial-drones-the-chad-photos/
*It
is
called a "dragonfly drone" because "it moves like a
dragonfly". Its motion is jerky, not smooth and continuous.
This
is consistent with the idea that field propulsion systems
would use point-to-point, start-stop navigation. As for the
photos, some regard them as 'too detailed to be faked'; others regard
them as 'having too much detail to be real'. (Similar claims
can
probably be made about the 1969 moon landings!)
Field
visualizations: http://web.mit.edu/8.02t/www/802TEAL3D/visualizations/guidedtour/Tour.htm
Some
others:
(Pictures
like these remind me of a
problem I have with organizations that investigate UFO
sightings: they only investigate sightings.
As such, they are like "investigative journalists" and
"mystery writers". But people like me want to know what these things
are, not just that they are mysterious. I can understand why UFO
organizations would not have a physics and engineering research staff,
but they could at least give a list of contacts for groups who are
investigating the physics behind these things. UFOs seem to have
mastered the "physics of non-local phenomena" (for lack of a better
term, although "monstrous
physics" also appears in the popular literature ). This kind
of physics appears in the public textbooks only in the form of quantum
mechanics. We need to extend the science of non-local behaviors to
things the size of aircraft carriers that can float in the sky and
which can disappear in an instant (http://youtu.be/DNFyjWANDmw?t=127
) or make high speed right angle turns.
Engineerable technology of this sort has been
around for over a hundred years, but the science
behind it has never been made public.)
What is
perhaps a start at addressing
the science questions can be found at http://droneteam.com/drt/index.php?topic=869.0
Or
maybe you could just go to
the US Patent and Trademark Office to find out how UFOs work:
Obviously
a Top Secret
design :-)
I liked the splash of Geometric Algebra (paragraph 0009) in the patent application (http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2006/0145019.html
). See "An Appeal to my Readers" at http://scripturalphysics.org/4v4a/BeyondEinstein.html#Appeal
The
patent reads like this is a tabletop model that could be constructed by
a hobbyist or by a microwave engineer However, very
little
is said about the parabolic antenna or the motion control hemispheres.
My gut feeling is that the hemispheres have to do with the
alteration of the electrostatic field profile for motion control. It is
not clear if the parabolic antenna is a direct part of the
propulsion scheme. However, the patent is careful to note that "the
electric field arrows are parallel crossing the center parabolic
antenna (C). The electric field is also parallel to the side (D) of the
triangle." That seems to imply a functional purpose of the
parabolic antenna (vertical lift?).
The
patent also notes the use of "traveling waves". One of the
problems antigravity designs have to deal with is the symmetry of the
gravitational field, which, at a fundamental level is mathematically
scalar. The symmetry needs to become unbalanced for
antigravity to work. But electric and magnetic fields are
also
fundamentally scalar (they differ from gravity only in dimensions;
their apparent directional traits originate from a coupling
to
the reference system) How do you get fundamentally symmetric
fields to become unsymmetric? One scheme could be based on rotation (as
above). The patent seems to refer to this with its reference
to
"travelling waves" (See Fig. 5).
If
it works, it is ingenious. Hobbyists out there have a new toy to play
with. Unfortunately, I have some serious doubts. See https://zapatopi.net/blog/?post=200604284330.st_clair_hyperinventor
Or do a Google search with the terms
"John St. Clair" "San Juan" "Hyperspace Research" .
Here is another, more recent one: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/10144532.pdf Salvatore Cezar Pais, 12/04/2018 https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/28729/docs-show-navy-got-ufo-patent-granted-by-warning-of-similar-chinese-tech-advances
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/31798/the-secretive-inventor-of-the-navys-bizarre-ufo-patents-finally-talks
This one is actually worth reading: "Capacitive-discharge electromagnetic propulsion system" (http://www.freepatentsonline.com/10135323.html ):
Physicists
have known since at least 1952 that apparent violations of NTL, in
cases where force interactions involve charged particles and
electromagnetic fields, simply do not account for the momentum carried
in the fields themselves. As noted by Cullwick over sixty years ago:
“The following simple relations between electromagnetic momentum, the
Poynting vector for energy transport, and mass-energy equivalence do
not appear to have received general recognition in connection with the
validity of Newton's Third Law when applied to electromagnetic forces
(Cullwick, Nature).”
Since then, over thirty US patents and at least two dozen foreign
patents have been issued for propellantless propulsion devices. Most
importantly, recent experimental investigations conducted by NASA with
an EM drive device (White, AIAA Journal of Propulsion and Power) have definitively confirmed that EM field propulsion is a reality.
_____
If you
want more in-depth
coverage of
the Biefeld-Brown effect and related effects, I highly recommend
reading:
Secrets
of Antigravity
Propulsion by physicist Paul A. LaViolette (2008).
"Progress
in Electrogravitics and
Electrokinetics for Aviation and Space Travel", Thomas F. Valone,
presented at the Space Tech. App. Info. Forum, Albuquerque, NM; http://users.erols.com/iri/ProgressElectrograviticsElectrokinetics.PDF
, http://www.integrityresearchinstitute.org/
Electrogravitics
Systems,
Vol I, Thomas Valone, 6th ed., 2008
Electrogravitics
II,
Thomas Valone, 3rd ed., 2008
T.T.
Brown's
Electrogravitics Research, Thomas Valone, Integrity Research
Institute
T.T. Brown
Family web site, http://www.qualight.com/portal.htm/brown/
"Electric
Flying Machines", T.T Brown,
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_flyingobjects25.htm
"Electrogravitics
systems reports on a
new propulsion methodology", Thomas Valone, 2001; http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/archivos_pdf/electrogravitics_systems.pdf
"Can
Electricity Destroy Gravitation?", Prof.
Francis E. Nipher Electro-Gravitic Experiments,
(1918) http://www.rexresearch.com/nipher/nipher1.htm
"Theoretical
explanation of the
Biefeld-Brown Effect",Takaaki Musha, http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/03PDF_files/Biefeld_Brown_Effect.pdf
"Explanation
of dynamical
Biefeld-Brown Effect from the standpoint of ZPF field", Takaaki Musha
http://jnaudin.free.fr/lifters/musha/Musha.pdf
"Force on
an Asymmetric Capacitor",
Thomas B. Bahder and Chris Fazi, March 2003.http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0211/0211001.pdf
"Asymmetric
capacitor operating in
high vacuum", http://www.youtube.com/user/hec031
(in this experiment the direction of thrust is towards the negative,
smaller electrode. Max voltage was 18kV @ 3 micro amp)
"Study
on
the influence that the number of positive ion
sources has in the propulsion efficiency of an asymmetric capacitor in
nitrogen gas", A A Martins1 and M J Pinheiro2, http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1009/1009.6111.pdf
"T. T. Brown’s
1955-1956 Paris Experiments Revealed", http://starburstfound.org/electrograviticsblog/?p=49
NOTE: the articles
that formerly occupied this space have been moved to:
Various reported electrogravity, magnetogravity
and
gravomechanical effects
Brown’s
patents:
A Method
of and an
Apparatus or Machine for Producing Force or Motion (Nov. 15,
1928)
British
Patent 300311; "How I control gravitation" http://www.rexresearch.com/gravitor/gravitor.htm
Electrostatic
motor
(1934-09-25,
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/1974483.pdf
Electrokinetic apparatus (1960-08-16)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/2949550.pdf
Electrokinetic transducer
(1962-01-23)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3018394.pdf
Electrokinetic generator (1962-02-20)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3022430.pdf
Electrokinetic apparatus (1965-06-01)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3187206.pdf
Electric generator (1965-07-20)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3196296.pdf
Method and Apparatus for Producing Ions and Electrically-Charged
Aerosols ( 1967-01-03) 3296491
Fluid Flow Control System
(1970-06-30) http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3518462.pdf
(Motion of contaminants http://www.electrotechnik.net/2013/04/breakdown-in-liquids-due-to-presence-of.html
)
A.
H
Bahnson patents:
Electrical
Thrust Producing Device http://www.freepatentsonline.com/2958790.pdf
Electrical Thrust Producing Device http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3263102.pdf
http://jnaudin.free.fr/lifters/bbsv2/index.htm
Other
information:
"How
do
floating water bridges defy gravity?", Chelsea
Whyte, (2012) http://phys.org/news/2012-11-bridges-defy-gravity.html
"Utilization
of poly(ethylene terephthalate) plastic and
composition-modified barium titanate powders in a matrix that allows
polarization and the use of integrated-circuit technologies for the
production of lightweight ultrahigh electrical energy storage units
(EESU)" http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7466536.html
, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EEStor
"This
paper reports the successful creation of a new
ultracapacitor structure that offers a capacitance density on the order
of 100 to 200 Farads per cubic centimeter; versus the current state of
the art capacitance density of 1 F/cm3. " ("New
mega-farad ultracapacitors", Bakhoum, E., 2009, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=4775259
"An
asymmetric supercapacitor using
RuO2/TiO2 nanotube composite and activated carbon electrodes",Yong-Gang
Wang, Zi-Dong Wang, Yong-Yao Xia, 2005, http://www.chemistry.fudan.edu.cn/usr2000/xyy/pdf_web/2005/ea-ruo2.pdf
"We
report
the observation of extremely high dielectric
permittivity exceeding 109 and
magnetocapacitance of the order of 104 % in
La0.875Sr0.125MnO3 single crystal." ("Giant dielectric permittivity and
magnetocapacitance in La0.875Sr0.125MnO3 single crystals", R. F. Mamin,
T. Egami, Z. Marton, and S. A. Migachev, 29 March 2007; DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.75.115129
;
PACS numbers: 77.22.d, 71.45.d, 75.47.Lx; http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1158&context=physics_papers
)
"Extremely
high values of the relative permittivity up to
107 and the magnetocapacitance up to 105
% have been found in La1 - x Sr
x MnO3
single crystals (x = 0.1, 0.11). These phenomena are
observed even at room temperature." ("Giant dielectric susceptibility
and magnetocapacitance effect in manganites at room temperature", R.
F. Mamin, T.
Egami, Z.
Marton, C.
A. Migachev and M.
F. Sadykov, JETP Letters Volume 86,
Number 10, 643-646, DOI: 10.1134/S0021364007220067 )
"Moreover,
our investigations in external magnetic fields
up to 5 T reveal the simultaneous occurrence of magnetocapacitance and
magnetoresistance of truly colossal magnitudes in this material."
("Colossal magnetocapacitance and colossal magnetoresistance in HgCr2S4",
S. Weber, P. Lunkenheimer, R. Fichtl, J. Hemberger, V. Tsurkan and A.
Loidl, http://arxiv.org/ftp/cond-mat/papers/0602/0602126.pdf
)
Calcium
copper titanate, k= 250,000 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_permittivity)
;
"Advanced Calcium Copper Titanate/Polyimide Functional Hybrid Films
with High Dielectric permittivity", Zhi-Min Dang, et al.
(2009), http://www.paper.edu.cn/index.php/default/scholar/downpaper/dangzhimin511435-201001-20[1].pdf
"Counterintuitive
discovery boosts supercapacitor energy
storage", Leo
Williams,
June 17, 2011,
http://www.rdmag.com/News/2011/06/Materials-Electrical-Engineering-Counterintuitive-discovery-boosts-supercapacitor-energy-storage/
Dissectable
Leyden jar retains its charge after
disassembly/reassembly: http://www.physics.ucla.edu/demoweb/demomanual/electricity_and_magnetism/electrostatics/dissectible_leyden_jar.html
http://www.sci-supply.com/productVideo.asp?id=222
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leyden_jar
"The
Antigravity Underground", Clive
Thompson, http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.08/pwr_antigravity_pr.html
http://www.amazing1.com/hv-dc-power-supplies.htm
Water
capacitors-Electrical: (dielectric is distilled
water) (disambiguation: WaterCapacitors-Chemical)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3558908.pdf
"High voltage impulse generator", Kulikov, Lagunov,
Nesterikhin, Fedorov, 1971:
"Since the
spark gap is of a controlled type, the
capacitor operates as a transmission line. Because of this, the rate of
rise of the current can be readily increased, since the internal
impedance of the transmission line is purely resistive. . . . The water
capacitor produces a negative voltage pulse of 250 kilovolts at 250
kiloamperes with a rise time of 50 nanoseconds."
Marx
generators: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marx_generator
, http://skyfi.org.ru/photos/?path=marksgen
, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPPMaDH7L7I
, http://ru-abandoned.livejournal.com/977217.html
Organic
liquid capacitors:
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3903460.html
"Capacitor with liquid dielectrics", Tsacoyeanes, Charles W.,
Payne, Richard, Levine, Morton A., 1975) : "A considerable
effort has been applied in recent years to the development of high
energy capacitors using water as the dielectric. The principal
attraction of water is its high dielectric constant (78.3) which
compares with values of only 2-3 for the transformer oils
conventionally used in capacitors. Furthermore, the dipole relaxation
time for water is in the picosecond time region and therefore has
little effect on the discharge characteristics. . . . it has been found
. . . that a range of high dielectric constant liquids possess
characteristics that make them useful as capacitor dielectrics. They
show a substantial improvement in energy storage capability, and also
possess other important advantages over water. The liquid dielectrics
of this invention are organic solvents with dielectric constants
ranging from 30-200. They are well-known to organic chemists and have
recently found important applications in electrochemistry. . . . The
use of the organic liquid dielectric materials of this invention
enables practical energy densities to be increased by a factor of 3 or
more over currently available devices which use a water dielectric and
the organic liquids have a much more stable conductance."
See
also
my own Capacitor
Tests.
Various reported electrogravity,
magnetogravity, and gravomechanical effects
George Samuel
Piggott Effect "Electro-Gravitation"
http://www.rexresearch.com/piggott/piggott.htm
(includes a "dark belt" observation)
http://www.keelynet.com/gravity/piggott.txt
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/1006786.pdf
(1911, Piggott's static generator for a space telegraph)
http://borderlandresearch.com/book/lost-science/electric-flying-machines-thomas-townsend-brown/9
http://www.ttbrown.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=12&start=90&st=0&sk=t&sd=a
http://www.rexresearch.com/piggott/piggott.htm
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/1006786.pdf
A quick
reading of Piggott's patent
(filed 1903, issued 1911) describes an electrostatic generator
("influence machine") for use in "space telegraphy" (radio). The
machine is essentially an industrial strength Wimshurst machine with
multiple pairs of counterrotating disks. It is enclosed in an air tight
container which is pressurized with dry air to about 30 p.s.i. The air
is supplied by a pump and dried over anhydrous calcium chloride (other
schemes, using a dry ice cold trap, for example, could be used). The
Leyden "condensers" on the wall are apparently part of the
Wimshurst design. The output is stored in a bank of "Leyden
jars" to the left of the "Static Machine". One side on the bank
connects to ground, and the other goes to the machine and the sphere on
the stand next to Piggott. Details of the patent relate to
the machine's use in "space telegraphy" wherein a single discharge
(spark) represents a "dot" and two closely spaced discharges represent
a "dash". The machine was powered by a 1/4 kilowatt electric motor.
The
machine is clearly capable of
producing pulsed, high voltage electricity of either polarity, and with
a fairly strong amount of current (at least several tens
of microamps,
more likely hundreds of microamps).
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wimshurst_machine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_de_Graaff_generator
) The repetition rate would be whatever is sufficient for use
in telegraphy. It is not clear from the picture however, whether the
levitation effect is occuring with a pulsed field or a purely static
field; it is difficult to see how a static field
could produce the levitation and dark band effects. Because
he intended to use the machine in space telegraphy, the spark
repetition rate would be important, and certainly he would have tested
it. If the
above represents such a test, the so-called spark
gap "switch" was probably at the big Leyden jar and was connected to
the test sphere by a cable. Likely the spark gap was
configured to ground the
sphere (rather than
charge it, which is another possibility); this would result in a slow
rising edge and a fast falling edge of
the
voltage waveform at the sphere. (Either configuration should
work, but there are a lot of unknowns here.
( It is more likely Piggott tested the machine in the normal
configuration in which it was to be used. The spark gap is above the
words "Static machine"; actual connections are not clear from the
photo, but it appears the test sphere was connected to the "Leyden jar"
and then to the spark gap through the aerial (85) terminal.
The
fundamentals are very similar to those of Tesla's monopolar,
monodirectional pulsed fields used in his Magnifying Transmitter, and
also to Edwin Gray's "cold electricity" machines (http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3890548.pdf
) , and to
the Testatika Machine designed by Paul Baumann. For some good
background, read The
Free Energy Secrets of Cold Electricity, Peter A.
Lindemann, D.Sc (2000)
http://www.teslasociety.ch/info/NTV_2011/free.pdf )
For the
design of an
ultrafast sparkgap switch see CapacitorTests/CapacitorTests.html#BiconicalFastSparkGaps
Tesla used magnetically quenched spark gaps, but they were
not
designed for coaxial, impedance controlled systems. There are
all
sorts of modern techniques to generate high voltage, fast rise time,
monopolar pulses. )
A
possible investigative concept machine could be built from a source of
monopolar (+) high voltage source such as a Van de Graaff generator
(500,000 volts @ a couple hundred microamps), a spark gap switch, and
several coaxial delay lines (each with a different delay) each
connecting to rods or spheres on a circular periphery. The delays are
such that a fast, rotating electric field is produced from a single
spark. A much slower mechanically rotated pulsed field should also be
investigated. What comes to mind are the rotary spark gaps of
the
early radio days (prior to the 1920s) and the automotive ignition
distributor. Even the cavity magnetron (with added
multiple outputs) comes to mind. Piggot's experiments apparently did
not use intentionally
rotated fields, nor did Farrow's. Other
applications of this sort of technology,
such as the Nazi
aircraft ignition disrupter and the dragonfly
drone, apparently did (however, these devices require a
directional control feature).
Piggott's
levitation experiments were performed with a small sphere serving as
the high voltage electrode. Says http://www.rexresearch.com/piggott/piggott.htm
:
Figure
3 illustrates suspension stand and field producing electrode. The
latter can be revolved in any direction by means of a spring motor
shown on the upper section of the stand.
The
small apertures seen in electrode, which is hollow, are there for the
purpose of ascertaining the action of the reduced field tension at
these points, and are also made use of to hold different sized metallic
discs, which are cemented to insulating plates, forming condensers, the
function of which is to create weak opposite polarities at these points
and thus show a reaction on the suspended object and also a greater
ocular effect in the vacuum tube.
Figure
4 is a detailed drawing of the vacuum tube principally used; this is of
the spectrum type, without sealed-in electrodes and when introduced
into the electrical fields, flows very brightly at its extremities,
especially giving a sharp line bordering the dark space around the
metallic object. A very high vacuum is sustained in the tube and it is
found necessary to build it of a very perfect insulating glass; the
bulb must be kept absolutely dry on its outer surface.
Were
these "apertures" essential to the levitation effect? Did
Piggott actually use "different
sized metallic discs, which are cemented to insulating plates, forming
condensers" on the sphere during his experiments? Were these
some
version of the one hundred million volt intensifiers
proposed by Tesla? We can only wonder if these details were
crucial to the levitation effect.
Additional
Note: The essence of Piggott's pulse forming scheme is found
in Fig. 7 of the patent:
|
|
 |
The
antenna or
"aerial" is item 85 and is connected to the positive HV terminal.
There are three sets of spark gaps shown (51), only one of
which
is in use at any one time. The central sphere (53) in the gap is used
to vary the capacitance for tuning ("syntonizing") the emission ( See
also Righi Spark Gap ).
Spheres 51 are about 1.5 inches in diameter and the
intermediate
sphere (53) is about 3 or 4 inches in diameter. "When a signal is to be
transmitted the negative terminal 51 is preferably adjusted to a
position quite close to the intermediate discharge ball 53 while the
positive discharge terminal 51 is placed about an inch away from the
center discharge ball so that a heavy strong spark occurs between the
positive sparking terminal and the center discharge ball."
The two
Leyden jars, or series of jars, are at 83 and are used for improving
efficiency and for tuning. The signaling switch (59) in figures 4 and 5
is pressed to move
a corona leak rod (66), allowing charge to rapidly build up and rapidly
fire the spark gap (comprised of 51,53, 51), the length of which is
adjustable. (Note that the signal switch is used to turn OFF
the leak;
this
machine was intended for signaling, not antigravity. See also #TrapsForUnwary )
Here
is a partial description of
Piggott's electrogravitic experiments from "Electric Flying
Machines: Thomas Townsend Brown", Gerry Vassilatos (
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_flyingobjects25.htm
http://borderlandresearch.com/book/lost-science/electric-flying-machines-thomas-townsend-brown/1
;
"Mr.
Piggot observed
a strange electro-gravitational effect. It was first seen, the result
of accidental occurrences while performing unrelated electrical
experiments.
Mr.
Piggot was able
to suspend heavy silver beads . . . and other materials in the air
space between a charged sphere and a concave ground plate when his
generator was fully charged at 500,000 electrostatic volts. The
levitational feat was only observed when the charged sphere was
electropositive.
The
Piggot effect was
clearly not a purely electrical phenomenon. If it were, then the
presence of the grounded plate would have destroyed the effect. The
very instant in which a discharged passed to ground, every suspended
object would have come crashing down. But, without the ground
counterpoise, the levitational effect was not observed. Mr. Piggot
believed that he was modifying the local gravitational field in some
inexplicable manner, the effect being the result of interaction between
the static field generator and some other agency the ground.
Piggot
further stated
that heated metal marbles fell further away from the field center than
cold ones. These suspended marbles remained in the flotation space for
at least 1.25 seconds even after the static generator ceased rotating.
The marbles fell very slowly after the field was completely removed; a
noticeable departure from normal gravitational behavior.
Mr. Piggot stated that suspended
objects were surrounded by a radiant “black belt”. . . .
Effects developed by Piggot were entirely similar to those
observed by Nikola Tesla, who employed high voltage electrostatic
impulses.
The
Piggott device certainly discharged its tremendous charge in a rapid
staccato-like fashion to the ground plate. The rate of this
disruptive unidirectional field . . . . certainly it was a
very
rapid impulse rate.
. . .
George
Piggot mentioned the mysterious “black band” which appeared around his
highly charged suspended metal marbles. Light seemed to disappear into
these zones. But it was Nikola Tesla, whose forgotten and ignored
testimony on the perceptual effects of high voltage electrical systems
took first place. Tesla produced such intense electrical arcs that the
same strange blackout effects were repeatedly observed. In the case of
Tesla’s famed Colorado Springs Experiments, the blackout effect
produced a lingering state . . . .
Noted
in
his published diary, the results followed the intense activity of his
Magnifying Transformer. Visual distortions, clarifications, black
shadows, black streamers, black waves, lingered for hours all around
his plateau laboratory, whereby he stated that:
“These
phenomena are so striking that they cannot be satisfactorily explained
by any plausible hypothesis, and I am led to believe that possibly the
strong electrification of the air, which is often noted to an
extraordinary degree, may be more or less responsible for their
occurrence.” "
What is a
possible
explanation for the lingering "black belt" and lingering antigravity
effects seen in the experiments of Tesla and Piggott, and in
observations of UFOs (see below)?. A working hypothesis is
that
these are both manifestations of temporal momentum effects on the air
in the surrounding the environment. It is well known that jet
aircraft leave behind spatial
momentum
effects on the air during flight (wind, air turbulence, etc.)
and that these effects take time to dissipate. The same could
be
true of temporal momentum effects on the air (absorption of light being
one of them?). But in such a case, there may not be a change
in
spatial position, as this is a kind of "motionless
motion."
Likewise, jet aircraft don't suddenly fall out of the sky
when
they shut off their engines. Presumably, a similar effect may
apply to UFOs. If their propulsion means were shut off, they would be
expected to descend like a fluttering leaf or feather, not drop like a
bomb.
See also "Review of Electrogravitics & Electrokinetics Propulsion". Thomas F. Valone (2015), International Journal of Geosciences, Vol.06 No.04(2015), Article ID:55806, 15 pages http://file.scirp.org/pdf/IJG_2015042015204020.pdf
High Speed Pulse Technology,
Volume 1, Frank B. A. Frungel, (1965) See "12. Steepness of
voltage Shock Pulses", p. 266+ . (Note that this technology was
available in the 1950s)
". . . an elegant solution of a spark gap for steep discharges" p. 268
Millimicrosecond Pulse Techniques, F. H. Wells (1959)
UFOs with possible dark
band ("black halo") effects:
Here
is a link to the 2013 Aquadilla Puerto Rico sighting. Note the
black fuzz on the UFO. (I suggest viewing this in Full Screen and
with the playback speed reduced to 0.25).
Flying
Suacer Review, Jan-Feb 1979: "It looked like two saucers
joined at the rims by black band"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMz0oafObW0&feature=player_detailpage#t=65
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMz0oafObW0&feature=player_detailpage#t=156
http://youtu.be/x_BnS683nCA
11-6-2015 UFO rods Sunnyvale, CA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBFo2xSDTbc
(view in full screen mode)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_eEdrCiSOA#t=331
(similar)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leE7AT9v-Rk
https://youtu.be/_E23e9cye9M
"INSANE!
Best UFO Sightings Of June 2015 [Breaking News] Share This!"
("black halo" at 28:57 and 29:30)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NO0QjKzTo-M
"Freaky black circle over Disneyland"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWM0twSuBQY&ebc
"Black Smoke Portals" Opening in Skies Around The World?
(2015)
Milwaukee
sightings 7-27-15 (Caution: profane language)
http://youtu.be/2lWVqp0PhbI
"UFO
Releasing Glowing Orbs Into a Formation in Western
Massachusetts", http://youtu.be/Kp4jxRPCaz8
http://youtu.be/Yc5StQpaUqk
"UFO Orb or Government Experiment Caught on Camera (Strange Lights in
the Sky)" http://youtu.be/hU7K2SUuqPM?list=UU3cUZkyN3CPqlw1BGzChsgA
"Video captures 10 white globes floating in sky above Osaka in Japan",
http://youtu.be/xIG8TwyV_qE
"The Best UFO Cases Ever Caught On Tape", https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1H9S_Yk89Y
https://youtu.be/N1H9S_Yk89Y?t=1995
(one of several)
"Mysterious rings were seen in Ulan-Ude" http://www.openminds.tv/wp-content/uploads/information-items_3643.jpg
http://www.google.com/search?q=mysterious+sky+rings
".
. . he took three photographs of the metallic-appearing
object,
and a forth of a black "smoke ring" left behind by the object after it
departed at high speed." (The
UFO Evidence, Vol. 2, Richard H. Hall (2001)
p. 284 )
http://www.caelestia.be/ringvortex.html
"Ring-shaped vortices"
https://www.altpropulsion.com/
https://www.americanantigravity.com/
Note: If
you want to
inspect YouTube videos frame-by-frame or in slow motion, click the youtube Settings icon (gear) and set the "playback speed" to a lower, or customized setting (examples:
http://youtu.be/_BgJEXQkjNQ?t=71
(watch
for a UFO at 1:11 (upper right to left) for about 5
frames)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0drMT6bOpGY (UFO starting at 00:10 )
http://youtu.be/elpy1em9rOE
(UFO starting at 00:28.45)
http
://youtu.be/lpdBEFuH-yk (UFOs starting at
00:12.06
It should
be noted that
the 1880s and 1890s saw the development of high voltage electrical
machines and spark gaps "switches" that could be used to generate radio
waves and microwaves:
Just
one
hundred years ago, J.C. Bose described to the Royal Institution in
London his research carried out in Calcutta at millimeter wavelengths.
He used waveguides, horn antennas, dielectric lenses, various
polarizers and even semiconductors at frequencies as high as 60 GHz;
much of his original equipment is still in existence, now at the Bose
Institute in Calcutta. Some concepts from his original 1897 papers have
been incorporated into a new 1.3-mm multi-beam receiver now in use on
the NRAO 12 Meter Telescope. . . .
Hertz
had
used a wavelength of 66 cm; other post-Hertzian pre-1900
experimenters used wavelengths well into the short cm-wave region, with
Bose in Calcutta [7,8] and Lebedew in Moscow [9] independently
performing experiments at wavelengths as short as 5 and 6 mm. https://www.cv.nrao.edu/~demerson/bose/bose.html
This means
that the
technology of those days was capable of producing high voltage,
monopolar pulsed power with asymmetric rise and fall times. This is
exactly the kind of circumstance that surrounds the discovery of
electrical levitation effects. One would certainly wonder if this has
anything to do with the "airship sightings" of the late 1890s .
Loose ends:
http://altereddimensions.net/2013/mysterious-new-mexico-brilliant-flash-of-light-august-15-1999
; http://www.sandia.gov/LabNews/LN09-10-99/meteor_story.html
_____
Edward S.
Farrow Gravity Reduction:
http://www.rexresearch.com/farrow/farrow.htm
(weight reduction by means of a "condensing
dynamo" circa 1911; Note reference to "condensing dynamo" and "current
sent the wheels in the dynamo whirring". The description is too vague
to reproduce the device (words in the article and the photos suggest,
possibly, it included the equivalent of a powerful ignition coil
("Ruhmkorff coil"), a rotary spark gap, and aerial wires). A
patent was not issued.
Ruhmkorff
coils can
produce monopolar pulsed high voltage with asymmetric time derivatives
on the rise and fall times of the high voltage. This, and the Piggott
experiment, suggest that high voltage pulsed monopolar (+) power with
asymmetric time derivatives may somehow be connected with levitation or
weight reduction effects.
http://www.rexresearch.com/farrow/farrow.htm
Ruhmkorff coil http://www.sparkmuseum.com/INDUCT.HTM
http://keelynet.com/gravity/farrow.htm
http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/Others/Others-Doc-Science&Forteana/+Doc-Science-StrangePhysics/TamingGravity.htm
(The article states "In all likelihood it
was no more
than an electromagnet". This is very unlikely given the above
descriptions.)
http://books.google.com/books?id=eLlMAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA260&lpg=PA260&dq=edward+farrow+condensing+dynamo&source=bl&ots=2LhmIyuQsz&sig=Kvw4Zbrp8epEZa6SjVRWrkoMgzo&hl=
en&sa=X&ei=rat0UKvgEYKsjAK3i4GACw&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=edward%20farrow%20condensing%20dynamo&f=false
(alternate
source)
http://www.auctiva.com/hostedimages/showimage.aspx?gid=780399&ppid=1122&image=470211125&image
s=470211109,470211125,470211142,470211088&formats=0,0,0,0&format=0
(4 pictures of Technical World
Magazine,
"Gravity Conquered at Last", Vol XVI, No.3, November 11, pages 257-260)
"How to
overcome Gravity by Hertzian
Air Waves", http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=F40C12FF3A5517738DDDAF0994DF405B818DF1D3
(the reference to Hetzian air waves implies that the wires going out of
the photo are aerials intended to spread the effect)
"Science
versus Gravity" (Flight
Magazine, Dec 2, 1911) http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1911/1911%20-%201046.html
Ruhmkorff
Coils:
http://twfpowerelectronics.com/~kurt/InductionCoils/12cmSpark1703.jpg
(Notice the stack of "pancake"
windings)
http://www.electrotherapymuseum.com/2005/Norrie/index.htm
(4th edition, 1907 ?)
http://archive.org/download/inductioncoilsho00schn/inductioncoilsho00schn.pdf
(2nd edition, 1901)
(note spark length of 45 inches)
"Induction
Coils How to Make Use and
Repair Them", H.S. Norrie (1907) http://www.electrotherapymuseum.com/2005/Norrie/index.htm
http://archive.org/download/inductioncoilsho00schn/inductioncoilsho00schn.pdf
(recommended)
Dr.
Francis E. Nipher Electro-Gravitic
Experiments
http://www.rexresearch.com/nipher/nipher1.htm#1
(studies on gravitation)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Eugene_Nipher
http://kirkwood.patch.com/listings/nipher-middle-school
http://library.wustl.edu/units/spec/archives/guides/pdf/nipher.pdf
http://genforum.genealogy.com/nipher/messages/2.html
(Dr.
Nipher was an
esteemed educator and was professor of physics at Washington University
at St. Louis, Missouri. He was also president for several
years of the St. Louis Academy of Science and of the Engineers Club. He
wrote several valuable papers in the late 1800s. Nipher Middle School
was named after him.)
Hutchison
effect:
http://www.hutchisoneffect.ca/
http://www.world-mysteries.com/hutchison_e.htm
http://www.slideshare.net/johnkhutchison/hutchison-effect
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnBdhsXl088&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gf_z2QFQxLk&NR=1
http://www.skywise711.com/Skeptic/Hutchison/hutchison.html
http://www.americanantigravity.com/documents/The-Ultimate-Hutchison.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Mysteries
:
"In
1979, Hutchison claims to have discovered a number of unusual
phenomena, while trying to duplicate experiments done by Nikola Tesla.
He refers to several of these phenomena jointly under the name “the
Hutchison effect”, including: levitation of heavy objects; fusion of
dissimilar materials such as metal and wood; while lacking any
displacement, the anomalous heating of metals without burning adjacent
material; the spontaneous fracturing of metals; changes in the
crystalline structure and physical properties of metals; disappearance
of metal samples."
http://www.scribd.com/doc/15125148/Secrets-of-Cold-War-Technology
(p 50; Hutchison effect by Tesla?)
Searl
effect (and similar):
Searl:
http://searlsolution.com/
http://www.searlsolution.com/documents/searlslevitydiscgenerator.pdf
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kJX17LgBYaQ
http://searlsolution.com/members/technology6.html
("An
Example of
Self–Acceleration for Incompressible Flows", Jens Lorenz, Randy Ott
(2013)
http://www.math.unm.edu/~lorenz/publi/selfac.pdf
some sort of possible relevance?)
_____
Roschin
and Godin:
"Orbiting
Multi-roller Homopolar
System", Vladimir Vitalievich Roschin, Sergi Mikhailovich Godin (2004)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6822361.pdf
About
Strange Effects
Related to Rotating Magnetic Systems, M. Pitkänen http://www.worldsci.org/pdf/ebooks/Pitknen-AboutStrangeEffectsRelatedtoRotatingMagneticSystems.pdf
(see chapter 3)
_____
Morningstar:
"The
Morningstar Energy Box", Paul A. Murad, Morgan J.
Boardman, John E. Brandenburg, Jonathan McCabe, Wayne Mitzen http://www.morningstarap.com/downloads/Morningstar%20Energy%20Box%20AIAA%202012_4_920.pdf
"Abstract.
The Morningstar Energy Box
is a derivative of both the Searl device and a variant of the Russian
Scientists Godin and Roschin. Laminated rollers and a main ring with
ferromagnetic fluid are used to enhance electrical and magnetic
properties. The device is constrained by a mechanical cage to hold the
rollers. An operational theory for the Energy Box uses rotating
electromagnetic fields different from either Searl or the Russians.
Moreover, the Russians made several serious claims that produced
self-acceleration to generate electricity, created a large weight loss
when spun in one direction and weight gain when spun in the opposite
direction. They also claimed their device generated discrete magnetic
walls. To date, no one has validated these outrageous Russian claims.
However, the Energy Box found similar phenomenon regarding the discrete
magnetic walls with both weight gain and loss, although not at the same
magnitude. Where they claimed to lose as much as 35% of the weight of a
375 kg armature, the Energy Box in an early test only lost 2 to 5
pounds of its 190 pounds at steady-state. During transient rotation
changes, the weight change dropped as much as 20 to 40 pounds. However,
a last test series recorded a weight lost of 14 pounds with a 7.3%
change during steady-state. We can state that we saw similar phenomena
as the Russian claims as well as lost weight and the device may
represent an advanced propulsion scheme for space travel."
Tapered Ring
Device
http://www.morningstarap.com/downloads/Morningstar%20Energy%20Box%20AIAA%202012_4_920.pdf
http://www.morningstarap.com/downloads/The%20Murad-Brandenburg%20Equation.pdf
It would
be insightful to know if (or
how) the tilt and rotation addresses the gravitational symmetry problem.
Also, atoms do have a space/time "polarity" and so it is not
necessarily "outrageous" that rotation would produce "a large weight
loss when spun in one direction and weight gain when spun in the
opposite direction."
https://www.americanantigravity.com/alexey-chekurkovs-antigravity-device
"Chekurkov
claims to achieve his anti-gravity effect by utilizing motors to spin
two counter-rotating disks, which are charged with a high-voltage
apparatus and have circular rows of magnets attached."
https://i.imgur.com/TEwwspa.jpg :
https://i.imgur.com/GJjm56N.png :
https://i.imgur.com/tTRSkas.jpg :
More photos and many more details can be found at: http://www.rexresearch.com/chekurkov/chekurkov.html
(note the reference to pulsed DC. This can be equivalent to
simple harmoic motion, which, loosely, is "rotation without rotation".
See https://www.academia.edu/41485052/Intuitive_Concepts_for_Atomic_and_Photon_Spin_Systems )
Otis T. Carr
Carr
patented a flying saucer, and asserted he was working on a full-size
version that could fly to the Moon and return in less than a day, using
two counter-rotating metal plates, spinning electromagnets and large
capacitors, which when spinning charged and powered by a battery, which
became "activated by the energy of space." Carr's scheme resembles
slightly earlier proposals by John R. R. Searl and Thomas Townsend Brown.
Carr also claimed to have invented "The Gravity Electric Generator",
"The Utron Electric battery", "The Carrotto Gravity Motor", and "The
Photon Gun".
"Space vehicle Propelled by the Presure of Inflationary Vacuum State", Boris Volfson March 14, 2005 https://www.freepatentsonline.com/6960975.pdf
_____
Nikola
Tesla:
http://journal.borderlands.com/2010/the-broadcast-power-of-nikola-tesla-part-1/ ( Gerry
Vassilatos — from Borderlands
(Vol. LII, Number 2, Second Quarter 1996) )
"Tesla
was sure that this new discovery would produce a completely new breed
of inventions, once tamed and regulated. Its effects differed
completely from those observed in high frequency alternating current.
These special radiant sparks were the result of non-reversing impulses.
In fact, this effect relied on the non-reversing nature of each applied
burst for its appearance. A quick contact charge by a powerful high
voltage dynamo was performing a feat of which no alternating generator
was capable. Here was a demonstration of “broadcast electricity”.
Most
researchers and engineers are fixed in their view of Nikola Tesla and
his discoveries. They seem curiously rigidified in the thought that his
only realm of experimental developments lay in alternating current
electricity. This is an erroneous conception which careful patent study
reveals. Few recognize the documented facts that, after his work with
alternating currents was completed, Tesla switched over completely to
the study of impulse currents. His patents from this period to the end
of his career are filled with the terminology equated with electrical
impulses alone.
The
secret lay principally in the direct current application in a small
time interval. Tesla studied this time increment, believing that it
might be possible to eliminate the pain field by shortening the length
of time during which the switch contact is made. In a daring series of
experiments, he developed rapid mechanical rotary switches which
handled very high direct voltage potentials. Each contact lasted an
average of one ten-thousandth second.
Exposing
himself to such impulses of very low power, he discovered to his joy
and amazement that the pain field was nearly absent. In its place was a
strange pressure effect which could be felt right through the copper
barriers. Increasing the power levels of this device produced no pain
increase, but did produce an intriguing increased pressure field. The
result of simple interrupted high voltage DC, the phenomenon was never
before reported except by witnesses of close lightning strokes. This
was erroneously attributed however to pressure effects in air.
.
. .
Tesla
made electrical measurements of this projective stream. One lead of a
galvanometer was connected to a copper plate, the other grounded. When
impulses were applied to wire line, the unattached and distant meter
registered a continual direct current. Current through space without
wires! Now here was something which impulses achieved, never observed
with alternating currents of any frequency.
Analysis
of this situation proved that electrical energy or electrically
productive energies were being projected from the impulse device as
rays, not waves. Tesla was amazed to find these rays absolutely
longitudinal in their action through space, describing them in a patent
as “light-like rays”. These observations conformed with theoretical
expectations described in 1854 by Kelvin.
In
another article Tesla calls them “dark-rays”, and “rays which are more
light-like in character”. The rays neither diminished with the inverse
square of the distance nor the inverse of the distance from their
source. They seemed to stretch out in a progressive shock-shell to
great distances without any apparent loss.
. . .
Most
imagine that the Tesla impulse system is merely a “very high frequency
alternator”. This is a completely erroneous notion, resulting in
effects which can never equal those to which Tesla referred. The
magnetic discharge device was a true stroke of genius. It rapidly
extinguishes capacitor charge in a single disruptive blast. This rapid
current rise and decline formed an impulse of extraordinary power.
Tesla called this form of automatic arc switching a “disruptive
discharge” circuit, distinguishing it from numerous other kinds of arc
discharge systems. It is very simply a means for interrupting a high
voltage direct current without allowing any backward current
alternations. When these conditions are satisfied, the Tesla Effect is
then observed.
. . .
The
asymmetrical positioning of the capacitor and the magnetic arc
determines the polarity of the impulse train. If the magnetic arc
device is placed near the positive charging side, then the strap is
charged negative and the resultant current discharge is decidedly
negative.
Tesla
approached the testing of his more powerful systems with certain fear.
Each step of the testing process was necessarily a dangerous one. But
he discovered that when the discharges exceeded ten thousand per
second, the painful shock effect was absent. Nerves of the body were
obviously incapable of registering the separate impulses. But this
insensitivity could lead to a most seductive death. The deadly aspects
of electricity might remain. Tesla was therefore all the more wary of
the experiments.
He
noticed that, though the pain field was gone, the familiar pressure
effect remained. In its place came a defined and penetrating heat. "
See also Poynting
vector insights (below) and Biconical
Fast Spark gaps.
"Dynamo
Electric Machine", Nikola
Tesla (1889) http://www.freepatentsonline.com/0406968.pdf
The
Free Energy Secrets of Cold Electricity,
Peter A. Lindemann, D.Sc , http://www.teslasociety.ch/info/NTV_2011/free.pdf
,
https://ia700403.us.archive.org/19/items/CompletePatentsOfNikolaTesla/Complete_Patents_Nikola_Tesla.pdf
http://nrgnair.com/MPT/zdi_tech/tesla/common/radiant/TRE1.htm
( http://donsmithcoils.blogspot.com/2010/06/don-l-smith-device.html ,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TI5XWz8aZvo,
http://cactuss.ru/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2012/05/pjkbook-21-extract.pdf
, http://freenrg.info/Misc/Resonance_NRG_Methods_Donald_Smith.pdf)
,
Magnetohydrodynamic
(field propulsion but not
antigravity)
"Magnetohydrodynamic
propulsion
apparatus", J. F. King (1967) http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3322374.pdf
Tornadoes
The
chaotic
electrical environment associated with tornadoes includes pulsed
monopolar electrical power, polarity reversals, rotating electric
fields, radio waves, etc. Could this environment produce
weird
levitation effects that are not explainable by air flow?
While
still speculative, there are suspicions that it can. See
"Tornadic levitation" in :
_____
Burkhart
Heim
"Physical Principles
of Advanced Space Propulsion
Based on Heims's Field Theory" Walter Dröscher, Jochem Häuser (2002)
"The coupling
obtained from Heim’s theory is
derived from fundamental principles, and is very different from the
ones obtained by other ad-hoc approaches. Heim's theory is therefore
much more interesting, since it may allow gravity manipulation at lower
energy densities, and is based on new physics, thereby leading to new
predictions. There may be several new and surprising physical phenomena
with far reaching consequences that are predicted by Heim's theory.
Some of these can be checked against presently available experimental
data, both from cosmology and quantum physics. The physical principle
is presented of how to construct a space propulsion device that does
not use any propellant, instead is based on an energy transformation
process. . . .
Since the interaction between gravitation and electromagnetism reduces
the inertial mass of a material object, it is called inertial
transformation. Since conservation laws for momentum and
energy are strictly adhered to, the theory requires superluminal
velocities, without contradicting Einstein's
theory of
relativity. Heim's physical theory, provided it reflects physical
reality, has the potential to lead to a completely new concept of space
transportation." http://www.hpcc-space.com/publications/documents/PrinciplesOfAdvancedSpacePropulsionAIAA-paper-2002-4094.pdf
"Guidelines
for a Space Propulsion Device based on Heim's
Quantum Theory", Walter Dröscher, Jochem Häuser (2004)
"According to HQT,
a transformation of electromagnetic energy into gravitational
energy should be possible. It is this interaction that is
used as the physical basis for the novel space propulsion concept,
termed field propulsion [1, 2], which is not
conceivable within the framework of current physics." http://www.hpcc-space.com/publications/documents/aiaa2004-3700-a4.pdf
(italics are in original)
Various inventors/authors/patents"Coupled
Gravitational Fields A New
Paradigm for Propulsion Science", Walter Dröscher, Jochem Hauser (2010)
"There seems to be
substantial evidence of
novel gravitational phenomena, based on both new
theoretical concepts as well as recent experiments by Tajmar et al. at
AIT, Austria that may have the potential to leading to advanced space propulsion
technology, utilizing two novel fundamental force fields. According to EHT these forces are
represented by two additional long range gravity-like force fields that
would be both attractive and repulsive, resulting from interaction of
electromagnetism with gravity. . . .
A simple analogy
is used to differentiate between
the classical
rocket principle (including all other means of propulsion) and the
novel field
propulsion concept of EHT incorporating
spacetime as a physical quantity. Suppose a boat is in the middle of a
large lake or ocean. In order to set the boat in motion, a force must
be mediated to the boat. The classical momentum principle requires that
a person in the boat is throwing, for instance, bricks in the opposite
direction to push the boat forward. However, everybody is well aware of
the fact that there is a much better propulsion mechanism available.
Instead of loading the boat with bricks, it is supplied with sculls,
and by rowing strongly the boat can be kept moving as long as rowing
continues. The important point is that the medium itself is
being utilized, i.e., the water of the lake or ocean,
which amounts to a completely different physical mechanism. The
rower transfers a tiny amount of momentum to the medium, but the boat
experiences a substantial amount of momentum to make it move. For space
propulsion the
medium is spacetime itself. Thus, if momentum can be
transferred to spacetime by field propulsion, a repulsive or recoil
force would be acting on the space vehicle moving it through the
medium, like a rowing boat. " http://www.hpcc-space.com/publications/documents/AIAA2010-021-NFF-1.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heim_theory
http://www.hpcc-space.com/publications/index.html
James
E.
Cox
"Dipolar
force field
propulsion system"
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4663932.pdf
Glenn E.
Hagen
"Flying
apparatus"
(atmospheric ion propulsion system)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3120363.pdf
Chris
B.
Hewatt patent
"Method
and apparatus for
gyroscopic propulsion" (???)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7832297.pdf
Jean
Claude Lafforgue patent:
"Isolated
systems self-propelled by electrostatic forces"
(March 1, 1991) FR 2651388 http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=19910301&CC=FR&NR=2651388A1&KC=A1
(See also http://jnaudin.free.fr/lfpt/index.html
)
E.
J. Saxl
patent:
"Device
for measuring gravitational and other forces", http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3357253.pdf
Woodward
patent:
"Method
and apparatus for generating propulsive forces
without the ejection of propellant", http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6098924.pdf
"Method
for transiently altering the mass of objects to
facilitate their transport or change their stationary apparent weights"
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5280864.pdf
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6347766.pdf
Rex
L.
Schlicher
"Nonlinear
electromagnetic
propulsion system and method"
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5142861.pdf
Hector
L.
Serrano patent:
WO
2000058623 http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?FT=D&date=20010118&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP&CC=WO&NR=0058623A3&KC=A3
http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=worldwide.espacenet.com&II=9&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20001005&CC=WO&NR=0058623A2&KC=A2
http://www.oocities.org/warpcore91/jlnlabs_sfptv1.pdf
"Propulsion Device and Method Employing Electric Fields for Producing
Thrust" http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6492784.pdf
Alerander
P. de Seversky
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3130945.pdf
"Ionocraft"
Leon
Sprink, Jacques Ravatin patents:
http://www.rexresearch.com/sprink/sprink.htm
British
685522
WO8000293 // FR2421531
Jonathan
W. Campbell patents:
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6317310.pdf
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6411493.pdf
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6775123.pdf
Henry
Wm
Wallace patents:
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3626605.pdf
, "Method and Apparatus for Generating a Secondary Gravitational Force
Field"
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3626606.pdf
, "Method and Apparatus for Generating a Dynamic Force Field"
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3823570.pdf
, "Heat Pump"
"The
Wallace inventions, spin aligned nuclei, the
gravitomagnetic field, and the Tampere experiment: Is there a
connection?", Robert Stirniman, May 1998, http://antigravitypower.tripod.com/stirniman/stirniman21.html
Schlicher
patent:
"Nonlinear
Electromagnetic Propulsion System and Method", http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5142861.pdf
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1971PhRvD...3..823S
, http://prd.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v3/i4/p823_1
Zinsser
Effect:
http://www.integrityresearchinstitute.org/Electrogravitics/ElectrograviticsAIAApaperValone2008.pdf
Saxl
Torsion Pendulum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erwin_Saxl
,
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1971PhRvD...3..823S
, http://prd.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v3/i4/p823_1
http://www.integrityresearchinstitute.org/Electrogravitics/ElectrograviticsAIAApaperValone2008.pdf
Grahm-Lahoz:
http://www.tts.lt/~nara/introduc/introduc.htm
Victor
Schauberger:
http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/Viktor%20Schauberger.htm
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/repulsin.htm
http://www.schauberger.co.uk/home.html
Morton
Effect
"Van
de
Graaff Generator Effect", Charles R.
Morton
http://amasci.com/freenrg/morton1.html
Alexander
Frolov's ELG-Hat Capacitor (related to Morton
effect?)
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/elghatv1.htm
http://www.faraday.ru/pot.htm
http://www.faraday.ru/t-cap.html
Trouton-Noble
Experiment:
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/troutnbl.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trouton%E2%80%93Noble_experiment
U.S. Navy Effect :-)
Counter-rotating
(or opposed) magnetic fields effect:
"Systems
for producing gravity neutral regions between
magnetic fields, in accordance with ECE-theory", Charles W. Kellum
(2012) http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20120105181.pdf
"Crossfield-Homopolar
Device", Charles W. Kellum (2012) http://aias.us/documents/DeviceDev/HPexp2.pdf
"Propulsion
System Using the Antigravity Force of the
Vacuum and Applications", Baptista de Alves Martins (2010)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/WO2010151161A2.pdf
; http://www.freepatentsonline.com/WO2010151161A8.pdf
(119 pages, 22 figures; several references to
magnetic vector potential)
"John
Brandenburg on Antigravity and Gravity-Control", http://www.americanantigravity.com/news/space/john-brandenburg-on-antigravity-and-gravity-control.html
https://www.google.com/search?q=counter+rotating+magnetic+fields&hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&rlz=1I7ADBF_en&tbm
=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=1aBKUfqLNMq0iQKHhICgCg&ved=0CH0QsAQ&biw=1016&bih=569
"Moving
flame experiment with liquid mercury: possible
implications for the Venus atmosphere", Schubert,
G. and J. A. Whitehead, (1969) Science, 163,
71--72
Abstract. A bunsen flame
rotated under a
cylindrical annulus filled with liquid mercury forces he liquid
mercury to rotate in a direction counter to that of the rotating flame.
The rate of rotation of the liquid is several times greater than that
of the flame. This observation may provide an explanation for the high
velocities of apparent cloud formations in the upper atmosphere of
Venus.
http://www.whoi.edu/cms/files/69Sch&WhScience_32423.pdf
Gravomechanical
Effect
"Anomalous
weight reduction on a gyroscopes right rotation around the vertical
axis of the earth", H. Hayasaka and S. Takeuchi (1989) http://earthtech.org/experiments/tajmar/papers/p2701_1.pdf
"Responding to
Mechanical Antigravity", Marc G. Millis, Nicholas E. Thomas (2006) http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20070004897_2007004127.pdf
http://www.rexresearch.com/brown2/brown2.htm#90
:
91.
Triboexcitation of Sorrento (FL) Red Sand.
Catalina
Island; March 30, 1973.
Test
No. 90 has been repeated today, making sure that the weighing was
accurately done at the Avalon Post Office (It is now confirmed by the
Postmaster, Pete G. Salamunovich).
The
sample of red sand which was tested was contained (as in Sec. 90) in a
glass Mason jar. In two day since the last excitation test on March 28,
the weight had returned to normal; i.e., 1 lb-14-1/2 oz. It was then
shaken for 30 minutes and then immediately (within 3 minutes) weighed.
It then weighed less than 1 lb-4-1/4 oz, having lost at least 1/2 oz,
possibly 0.3 oz.
This
loss of weight (if 0.3 oz is considered) represents a greater degree of
excitation than that recorded in Test 90. This may have been expected,
as the duration of shaking was increased 10 minutes. This represents a
loss of weight of 1 part in 101.6 or 0.984%. This represents an
excitation of 9.84 millighos or a value of g approx 970.6 cm/sec2
!
This
apparent confirmation is intriguing, to say the least!
T.T.
Brown (3-30-73)
Witnessed: J.P. Quillin (3-30-73)
(BF
comment: My initial reaction to this was "This is just
crazy!"
But motion has a both spatial component and a temporal
component (not the same thing as clock time). Gravitation is mostly temporal
motion. Any added spatial motion will oppose the gravitational motion. This includes linear motion, harmonic motion,
rotational motion, orbital motion, even an increase in temperature. Apparently,
the atoms to seek a new equilibrium with the combination of the two motions;
the added spatial component would express itself as a potential, and would have
a sign opposite to the normal gravitational motion. The effect would be very
small but would manifest itself as a weight loss or as an inertia loss,
depending on the experimental method. When the added excitation, stops, this
kind of motion should "decay", somewhat like a diffusion (i.e.,
non-directional). Hence, these experiments might not be as crazy as they at
first seem.)
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/tesla/occultether/occultether03.htm
Around 1870, Thomson had
conducted experiments which seemed to indicate that “gravitational
action” could be induced by spheroidal bodies oscillated by electrical
currents or mechanical pulses (F. Guthrie Phil. Mag. xli [1871], p.
405). The surface pulsations could cause attractions or repulsions in
respect to other bodies, as verified by Thomson. Tesla was aware of
Thomson’s work during his student days in Graz, Austria, beginning
1875, when he was 19.
Thomson’s
work undoubtedly served as the spark of inspiration for Tesla in his
early conception of an “ideal flying machine” which would be propelled
by electricity acting upon the ether. This explains Tesla’s continual
references to Thomson, such as demonstrating during his 1892 London
lecture, a ‘luminous wire’ sign powered by a Tesla coil, which said
“WILLIAM THOMSON”.
At first, Thomson found
that ponderomotive
forces act
between two solid bodies immersed in an incompressible fluid, when one
of the bodies is immobilized and made to oscillate with a force which
acts along a line between its center and that of a much larger sphere
which is free. The free sphere was attracted to the smaller
(immobilized) sphere, if its density was greater than the fluid, while
a sphere of less density than the fluid was repelled or attracted,
according to the ratio of its distance to the vibrator in relation to a
certain quantity (Phil. Mag, xli [1871], p. 405; Letter, Thomson to F.
Guthrie, p. 427.)
Thomson’s
experiments were analogical ones, for which he had evoked praise from
his contemporaries even when he was still a teenager, although his
refusal to believe anyone’s assertions unless he could build an
analogical model to prove them often led to the consternation of those
of his contemporaries, such as Maxwell,
who relied often on mathematical equations. The sphere experiments were
designed to use mechanical and electrical wave methods to construct a
model to probe the gravitational, inertial and momentive reactions of
solid bodies in the ether.
The
Faraday effect—the rotation of the plane of polarization of radiation
in a dielectric medium (such as the atmosphere, space, and certain
solid materials) in a magnetic field—stated that the angle of rotation
of radiation is proportional to the magnetic field strength and the
length of the path in the medium in the field. These early
experimenters knew there was a connection between the rotatory motion
and momentum, and sought to find it.
The
rotatory (versus the linear) character of magnetic phenomena was
strengthened by Thomson’s experimentally verified conclusions on the
magnetic rotation of light. This rotatory character not only influenced
Tesla’s discovery of the rotating magnetic field, but is also
fundamental to inertia and momentum, as I will later explain, since
movement of a charged body constitutes a current which creates a
magnetic field which creates the rotatory motion which “bores” through
the ether like a drill to create momentum.
Thomson’s system was later investigated by C.A.
Bjerknes between
1877 and 1910. Bjerknes showed that when two spheres immersed in an
incompressible fluid were pulsated, they exerted a mutual attraction
which obeyed Newton’s inverse square law if the pulsations were in
phase, while if the phases differed by a half wave, the spheres
repelled. At one quarter wave difference, there was no action. Where
pulses were non-instantaneous at distances greater than a quarter
wavelength, attractions and repulsions were reversed (Repertorium d.
Mathematik I [Leipzig, 1877], p. 268; Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. iii
[1879], p. 276; iv [1880], p. 29).
"Aether
Vibrations-A Wave Based Universe" (2012) http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_fisica36.htm
; http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2012/07/aether-vibrations-2357376.html?currentSplittedPage=0
Scalar or torsion waves now
seem to play a significant role in explaining our physical reality.
Although torsion fields are very weak they can be measured using
torsion beam balances that were first developed by Kozyrev. Torsion
waves create minute forces in matter and that’s how they can be
detected.
Torsion fields can be either static or dynamic. Static torsion fields
can take on the form of vortexes like the one mentioned in the
implosion physics of Daniel Winter. These static vortex torsion fields
in the fabric of the vacuum space can stay in one place for a very long
period of time. Kozyrev discovered that torsion fields can also
propagate through space as torsion waves at tremendous speeds at least
one billion times the speed of light (109 C).
He noticed that all physical objects both absorb and radiate torsion
waves.
By shaking, vibrating,
deforming, heating and cooling physical objects they generate
measurable torsion waves. Even the displacement of an object generates
torsion waves that can be measured. All movement therefore from the
vibrations of atoms to the orbits of our planets and stars leaves their
traces in the form of torsion waves in the aether.
A very remarkable phenomenon that Kozyrev discovered by rotating
gyroscopes is that they lose very small but measurable amounts of
weight. Also firmly shaking objects could make objects lose weight. Now
from our current understandings of physics this is quite impossible! It
violates all physical laws, how can solid matter lose weight when it is
spun at high speeds or shaken?
If we still believe that matter
is made of little hard marbles called particles, yes this would be a
great mystery!
However Kozyrev showed that the
gyroscopes shed more torsion waves when shaken or spun, so that
aetheric energy that sustains the object was shed back into the
background sea of the aether. The momentary loss of aether energy
accounted for the weight drop.
Dr. Harold Aspden of Cambridge University discovered a related
phenomenon. He attached a powerful magnet to a gyroscope and spun it at
high speeds. He measured the amount of energy required to accelerate
the gyroscope to full speed to be a 1000 Joules. Now to his surprise
when he stopped the gyroscope from spinning and restarted the gyroscope
to spin again within 60 seconds after it stopped, it required 10 times
less energy to spin the gyroscope to the same speed.
The spin of the gyroscope had
added extra spin to the aether that sustains the gyroscope that lasted
for a while before it wore off, rather like the momentum stored in the
tea of a teacup after stirring it with a teaspoon. We now know that
spinning magnets are strong torsion wave generators.
Ducretet
"At
about this same time [1911], a small antigravitational device was
independently developed in Paris. In this, a highly charged mica disc
spun at high rate and levitated when electrostatically charged
(Ducretet)." (Lost
Science, Gerry Vassilatos (1999) p. 243 ; Lost Science, Gerry
Vassilatos, p.174 ) http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Aetherforce_Libary/Lost%20Science/Gerry%20Vassilatos%20-Lost-Science-Complete-Edition.pdf
http://books.google.com/books?id=y8sSFTDkQ20C&pg=PA492&lpg=PA492&dq=ducretet+mica&source=bl&ots=XYdhnD6fX-&sig=EbNLvrI1d5DRF2sHLjJQYFcIxDw&
hl=en&sa=X&ei=cEo9VNDgM4yzogTI6YDABw&ved=0CEUQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=ducretet%20mica&f=false
Problems with rotating spacecraft or spacecraft with rotating components
Baffling
navigation problems were noticed with rotating spacecraft or
spacecraft with rotating components. From the book
Hidden Agenda: NASA and the Secret Space program, Mike Bara (2016) p. 89-93:
"The [elliptical] orbit of Explorer 1 . . . . came in at 225 miles , and 1,594 miles, an increase of almost 600 miles! That's a 60% higher orbit than they expected, and it's also why the spacecraft was 11 minutes late to the tracking station."
"When Explorer 3 was launched in March 1958, it . . . . attained a maximum altitude of 1,750 miles, more that 750 miles higher than estimated."
"When Explorer 4 was launched . . . it also attained an orbit nearly 400 miles higher than calculated."
"But when Luna 1 arrived in the vicinity of the Moon, it missed by 3,700 miles . . . ."
"Pioneer
4 was unique in that it was the first spin-stabilized satellite ever
launched. . . . It ended up missing the Moon by over 37,000 miles, more than 17 times its diameter."
"Despite this improved design, Ranger 3 also missed the Moon by nearly 23,000 miles, or nearly 12 times the Moon's diameter."
"Ranger 4
was launched in April 1962 and performed flawlessly until it solar
panels failed to deploy. Without solar power, the batteries were
quickly drained and the spacecraft became a dead clump of metal on a
ballistic trajectory toward the Moon. By all logic, without a working
guidance system or the ability to make a mid-course correction, it
should have missed the Moon as badly as all the other missions had. But
it didn't. It actually impacted the Moon, pretty much exactly where it
was supposed to!"
".
. . something in the dead spacecraft was different from what was in all
the "live" ones that had problems. . . . The difference was in the
rotation. All of the spacecraft which had shown this anomalous
overperformance had major components or subsystems which rotated at
high RPMs.. In fact, there was a direct correlation between the amount
and duration of the spin and the spacecraft's performance. The Explorer 1
Juno rocket for instance had a rotating third stage. . . . The Pioneer
and Ranger spacecraft were both spin stabilized and they also had
rotating gyroscopic guidance systems of board. When Ranger 4 went dead, the gyros stopped spinning and suddenly all their calculations worked, and it actually hit the Moon!"
Hence, there is a clear indication here that gravitation is somehow linked to rotation. In general, any
added motion will oppose the gravitational "towards" motion. In these
examples, the motion was rotational (which is regarded as absolute, not
relative) and it opposes Earth' gravity. Thus, each spacecraft
got an unexpected boost.
If the rotation effect is truly scalar at a fundamental (gravitational) level, some questions can be raised:
1.
Is the orbit of a planet affected by its rotation? Does the rotation
have an antigravity effect on its orbit? If the planet stopped
rotating, would its orbit be changed?
2. Suppose a spacecraft
runs out of propellant but still has electrical power. Could a long
trajectory towards a planetary body be changed by powering up two
counter-rotating masses (equal and opposite angular momentum) inside
the spacecraft? (note that this depends on a scalar effect).
3.
Can rotating elements on a spacecraft affect measurements of
fundamental constants (like the speed of light) being performed on the
spacecraft?
"Search
for Frame-Dragging-Like Signals Close to Spinning
Superconductors", M. Tajmar, F. Plesescu, B. Seifert, R.
Schnitzer, and I. Vasiljevich (August 2007) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/1757402_Search_for_Frame-Dragging-Like_Signals_Close_to_Spinning_Superconductors
"The Tajmar effect from Quantised Inertia", M.E. McCulloch (June 17, 2011) http://arxiv.org/pdf/1106.3266.pdf
"Gyroscope's unexplained acceleration may be due to modified inertia", by Lisa Zyga, https://phys.org/news/2011-07-gyroscope-unexplained-due-inertia.html
As
McCulloch explains, the Tajmar effect is closely related to another odd
observation: the unexplained acceleration of some spacecraft. For
instance, when interplanetary probes fly by the (spinning) Earth, some
of them undergo unexplained jumps in velocity. In a previous paper,
McCulloch showed that the MiHsC model agrees fairly well with these
flyby anomalies if a spacecraft’s acceleration is determined relative
to all the particles of matter in the spinning Earth. He also showed
that the model could explain the Pioneer anomaly: as the two Pioneer
spacecraft flew out of the Solar System, they slowed down more than
predicted, which can be attributed to the spacecrafts’ small decrease
of inertial mass, which increased their acceleration toward the Sun.
"Nonzero
Result of Measurement of Acceleration of Free Falling Gyroscope with
the Horizontal Axis", A. L. Dmitriev, E. M. Nikushchenko, S. A.
Bulgakova
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/45862536_Nonzero_Result_of_Measurement_of_Acceleration_of_Free_Falling_Gyroscope_with_the_Horizontal_Axis
"Frequency
Dependence of Rotor’s Free Falling Acceleration and Inequality of
Inertial and Gravity Masses" Alexander L. Dmitriev
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/48194960_Frequency_Dependence_of_Rotor's_Free_Falling_Acceleration_and_Inequalityof_Inertial_and_Gravity_Masses
"A Few Notes about Gyroscopes and Antigravity" by Mario Ludovico (2011) http://mario-ludovico.com/pdf/Gyroscopes%26Antigravity.pdf
See also Gravomechanical Effect (above) regarding T.T. Brown's experiments with shaken sand.
BF
note: The indications here are that matter and mass are not the same
thing. Mass is apparently somewhat dependent on an item's mechanical,
electrical, magnetic and thermal history, as well as its current
motional state.
Poynting
vector insights (electromagnetic momentum)
[edit
in progress]
Another
twist with the Poynting vector is embodied in the Crossed Field Antenna
(CFA), which is constructed much like a capacitor, but acts like a
radio antenna. Its claimed advantage is small size and higher gain,
especially at long wavelengths, when compared to conventional towers or
wire aerials. In a capacitor, the Poynting vector is always directed
inward (even when the current reverses) but in the CFA, the E and B
fields are manipulated so that the Poynting vector (S)
is directed outward:
Radio Antennas, Maurice C. Hatley, Fathi M.
Kabbary
(1992)
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5155495.pdf
As
far as I know, this scheme has never been tested for
gravity/antigravity effects. The voltages and waveforms might not be
conducive to these effects anyway. But the configuration raises
interesting questions about Poynting vector manipulations and
directional control. The commonly accepted paradigm is that a
meaningful Poynting vector is generated only if the E and B (or H)
fields are from the same source (cannot be independent) and must be
time varying. But the CFA alters the fields separately so as to create
a "synthetic" Poynting vector (forbidden fun!). Physicist Feynman also
reminds us about independent E and B fields; see example.
This implies that our current understanding of Maxwell's
equations might be merely a subset of something more general. That, in
turn, might help explain reports of some bizzare effects (unrelated to
gravity) of unusual configurations of electromagnetic equipment. Here
is snippet of a report about a Nazi weapon intended to stop Allied
aircraft engines:
"This
'transmitter was a strange contraption, a tower surrounded by an array
of posts with pear-shapted [sic] knobs on top. At
the same time a similar system was erected on the peak of the Feldberg
near Frankfurt. When it began operation, there were soon reports of
strange phenomena in the vicinity of the Brocken tower. Cars traveling
along the mountain roads would suddenly have engine failure. A
Luftwaffe sentry would soon spot the stranded car, and tell
the puzzled motorist that it was no use trying to get the car
started at present. After a while, the sentry would tell the driver
that the engine would work again now, and the care [sic]
would then start up and drive away." Hitler's
Suppressed and Still-Secret Weapons, Science and Technology,
Henry Stevens (2007) page 170-189 http://www.amazon.com/Hitlers-Suppressed-Still-Secret-Weapons-Technology/dp/1931882738#reader_1931882738
(Search inside
with "motorstoppmittel" and then select page 170 from
list;
Something
vaguely similar to this had been tried in "Project Rainbow"
(https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_flyingobjects25.htm
)"The
first series of Project Rainbow experiments was first performed with
the aim of "cloaking" tanks and heavy gun installations, that phase of
the experiment, which principally had stimulated the participation of
Dr. Brown. The high voltage impulses would necessarily be applied to a
ring of capacitors, which surrounded the object. It was critical that
these capacitors be oriented in such a manner that the spacewarp would
not engulf anyone within its perimeter.
The
system was remarkably and ruggedly simple. It is unknown what impulse
durations and repetition rates were actually employed when applying the
high voltage to the capacitor ring, but their repetitive frequency most
certainly were very low. As Dr. Brown had empirically discovered with
his gravitators years before, large capacitor values required longer
warp "saturation" times.
The
capacitor "axes" were radially disposed at a great distance from a
central point. From above the installation, the power cables formed
radial lines out to the periphery of a circle. Each radial cable was
connected to a terminal of a capacitor. There were many of these. The
capacitor axes pointed "in line" with the radial cables. Their precise
alignment was absolutely critical, since any deviation from this radial
symmetry would bring disaster.
The
outer terminals of all the capacitors were joined by a single circular
loop. Voltage was thus applied from center to periphery. These
capacitors, electrified by the high voltage dynamo and its ancillary
impulsing components, were collectively a very large capacitance."
See
also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelland_UFO_Case
, "The Tex Files: Levelland UFOs" http://www.myfoxdfw.com/story/17512052/the-tex-files-levelland-ufos
;
"UFOs:
More Engine Effects", James McCampbell (1985) http://www.nicap.org/More_Engine_Effects.htm
, http://www.nicap.org/papers/ufointerf.htm
)
"And
like Tesla, Marconi was reported to have been working on a war-ray.
His, it was said, would when perfected be able to stop airplane and
other motors many miles before invading forces could reach their
goals. . . . Marconi said little about his mysterious ray, nor will
Tesla discuss the details of his. It is his secret and he will not
reveal it, he says, except to the United States Governmnet . . . . But
of what it will do, he speaks freely. "This new type of force," he said
the other day, "would operate through a beam one one hundred-millionth
of a centimeter in diameter. . . . This beam would melt any
engine, whether Diesel or gasoline-driven." (Marconi's
partly-perfected beam was said to be ineffective against Diesel
engines). "It would also ignite any explosives aboard any
bomber. No possible defense against it could be devised, as
the
beam would be all-penetrating." " (
"THE NEW
ART OF PROJECTING CONCENTRATED
NON-DISPERSIVE ENERGY THROUGH NATURAL MEDIA System of Particle
Acceleration for Use in National Defense", Circa May 16, 1935, Briefly
Exposed by NIKOLA TESLA, http://www.teslaradio.com/pages/teleforce.htm p.
25/26 This article has several links to several news stories on this
topic from about 1934 to 1940. The stories would have been easily
accessible to Nazi scientists of those days, and they could have
figured out the remaining necessary details, as others evidently did
before this time period.)
"Inventor
Hides Secret of "Death Ray" ", "Before a group of
scientists, it is reported, he once demonstrated that the radiations
would kill rats, mice, and rabbits, even when the animals were incased
in a thick-walled metal chamber. " https://books.google.com/books?id=2CYDAAAAMBAJ&q=Longoria#v=snippet&q=Longoria&f=false
Dr. Antonio Longoria; Popular
Science (Feb 1940) p. 117 )
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Grindell_Matthews;
"The new Death-dealing Diabolic Rays," H. Grindle-Matthews (August
1924) http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Popular-Radio/Popular-Radio-1924-08.pdf
paper page 148-155
"In
1923 Matthews claimed that he had invented an electric ray that would
put magnetos out of action.[3] In a
demonstration to
some select journalists he stopped a motorcycle engine from a distance.
He also claimed that with enough power he could shoot down aeroplanes,
explode gunpowder, stop ships and incapacitate infantry from
the
distance of four miles. Newspapers obliged by publishing sensational
accounts of his invention."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_ray
The "Death Ray" (or "Beam") may have something to do with neutrinos or
the Weyl
fermion.
Others
include the so-called Hutchison
Effect with its reports of levitation of heavy objects,
delocalization ("dematerialization") of objects, anomalous mutilation
of metals, and so forth, and the Searl
effect with reports of weight loss, gravitational effects,
temperature decrease, "magnetic walls", etc. What these
configurations seem to have in common is the presence of high
voltages, electromagnetic waves ("radio waves"), rotating
fields, and a mixture of both
static and time varying electric and
magnetic fields—or something
like that. ( See also: Orbiting Multiroller Homopolar System, Roschin, et
al. http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6822361.pdf
and Tesla's patent "Dynamo-Electric Machine" (1889) http://www.freepatentsonline.com/406968.pdf
; "Beyond Electromagnetic Waves", Bibhas De, http://www.bibhasde.com/radiocomm.html
; "Vacuum Electromagnetic interaction", B R De, J. Phys. A:
Math. Gen. 26 (1993) 7583-7588 http://www.bibhasde.com/veipaper.pdf
; "How to build a flying saucer", Pentagon Aliens,
William Lyne, 3rd edition, p. 195-218 http://www.whale.to/b/lyne.pdf)
This
raises questions I wish someone would investigate:
1.
Accelerated electric charges produce ordinary
electromagnetic radiation. What effect would be produced by
accelerated magnetic charges? See: Radiation
from a charge in circular motion and math error note
. The latter note suggests that
spatially accelerated magnetic fields and the first time derivative of
an electric field will both independently produce Poynting vectors and
therefore a momentum flow; a combination of these might possibly
produce an effect very different from ordinary
electromagnetic radiation (radio waves). See UFO Physics and note what is said
about Weyl fermions and neutrino currents.
2.
The speed of gravity
and the speed of electric
and magnetic fields are instantaneous (because they are
"non-local" in their nature). The speed of light however, is finite,
and is exactly midway between the spatial zero and the temporal zero
for speeds. (see speed
diagram ) If light is a combination of electric and magnetic
fields, or even a "pure electric" oscillation, why is its speed finite?
Are other speeds possible for E and B field combinations between the
speed of light and infinite (temporal) speeds? Are other speeds
possible for E and B field combinations between the speed of light and
zero (spatial) speeds? The E and B fields are inherently temporal in
nature, but an inversion into the spatial spectrum of speeds might
occur at a quantization boundary. A natural quantity of speed
is c, the speed of light. But what is a natural
quantity of, say, voltage? I have not given much
thought about how to calculate it, but it appears to be at least
several tens of millions of volts, possibly much larger. Voltages (and
magnetic fields) approaching these levels could make for some very
interesting (and really weird, even scary) physics. We are
familiar with electric, magnetic, and electromagnetic fields (light).
But are these just special, particular instances of something more
general? Is there something "in between" these cases that was simply
not apparent in Maxwell's day? (See also an example calculation of
a unit quantity.)
3.
The engine failure effects seem to be vaguely the reverse of the
principles in the example
above which compares the energy of a wire moving through
space, with energy of space moving through a wire. The engine stopping
effect might be due to not only the "ionization of the air" shorting
out ignition systems, but something even more fundamental as well. The
effect described below takes place inside a wire, and involves the
wire's gravitational motion. Any field effect that alters that
gravitational motion, would be expected to alter the electron motion as
well (perhaps sending it sideways (leaping out of the wire), instead of
along the wire. However, the effect reportedly has burned out spark
plugs and neon signs.).
Tesla
noticed and researched a similar effect. It occurred when DC dynamos
were initially and suddenly switched into long transmission lines.
Note the phrase (below) "bluish needles, pointing straight
away from the
line into the surrounding space." The effect occurred only during the
instant of initial
switch closure. (A large pulse of stored energy
release would be expected upon suddenly
opening
a switch connected to a long DC transmission
line, but this effect occured before
the electrical energy was actually in the line.)
For more
details, see Secrets of
Cold War Technology: Project HAARP and Beyond ,
Gerry Vassilatos (2000) http://www.scribd.com/doc/15125148/Secrets-of-Cold-War-Technology
, p. 27 )
Long
transmission lines have two characteristics which may be relevant to
the observed effect: they have a large amount of
gravitational
mass, and they have large loop areas (which may have been minimized for
AC circuits, but not necessarily for DC circuits). Pulsing a
large loop area with a fast rise-time pulse would momentarily destroy
the symmetry and balance of the system with what I call the "Expansive
Ether" which fills the loop area enclosed by the gravitational mass.
The result could be a "backfire" of "hundreds of thousands,
even
millions of volts" upon connection to a dynamo producing only a few
thousand volts. See further: George Samuel
Piggott Effect "Electro-Gravitation" and "Discussion"
. Update:
Tesla apparently discovered a new type of electricity. See UFO Physics
.
Modern
transmission systems address this problem with Pre Insertion resistors:
Pre
Insertion
Resistors in Circuit Breakers ( http://www.electrotechnik.net/2017/11/pre-insertion-resistors-in-circuit.html
)
Circuit
breakers used in switching of long transmission lines have a resistors
which is pre-inserted between the contacts before the contacts are
closed. This resistor is called the Pre-insertion resistor. The
function of this resistor is to limit the initial charging current of
the line. The resistance of the line is around 500 ohms.
Once
the closing command is given to the breaker, the resistor is first
connected across the contacts. This resistance in series limits the
line current. A few milliseconds later, the contacts are
closed.
While
opening the breaker, the pre-insertion resistor is first disconnected
before the contacts are opened by the circuit breaker. Pre-insertion
resistors are also used in lines which have transformers to limit the
high inrush current.
(See also
https://www.academia.edu/9116079/Pre-insertion_Resistors_in_High_Voltage_Capacitor_Bank_Switching
; "A Knowledge Base for Switching Surge Transients" A. I. Ibrahim, member, IEEE, H. W. Dommel, Fellow, IEEE http://www.ipst.org/TechPapers/2005/IPST05_Paper050.pdf )
4. In the opening
paragraph of the section on Motion Cancellers, I said
that "The resultant motions are perpendicular to the motion used for
cancellation." This may help explain why UFOs are often
reported as disk shaped. The electro/magnetic equivalent of the air
flow across the card would be radial, and the resulting cancelled
motion would be perpendicular to the disk (i.e., vertical). A disk
would be the most natural form for this kind of field configuration.
(See also Reactionless
Propulsion and AntigravityLoophole
)
5.
German
research on the Nazi weapon described above was reportedly well
underway by 1936 (Stevens, p.131). The American technical intelligence
report is from 1945 (Stevens, p.174). During this period the German
engineers and scientists involved in this effort would surely have
noticed some levitation effects, and that in turn would have led to the
development of saucer shaped flying machines within a few years. But
there may have been predecessors even to that: related
levitation effects were noted by George Samuel Piggott circa 1911 (PiggottLinks), by Edward S. Farrow circa
1911 (Farrow links), and Dr Francis Nipher's electro-gravitation
experiments which were done circa 1916. Concurrent and even
prior to all that was Nikola Tesla's experiments. And, (I find this
interesting) there were waves of "airship sightings" in the late 1890s
in the United States. All this suggests that these startling levitation
effects could be demonstrated with electrical technology that has been
known for 115 years! ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mystery_airship
http://borderlandresearch.com/book/lost-science/electric-flying-machines-thomas-townsend-brown/1
)
Possibly
Relevant:
http://journal.borderlands.com/2010/the-broadcast-power-of-nikola-tesla-part-1/ ( Gerry
Vassilatos — from Borderlands
(Vol. LII, Number 2, Second Quarter 1996) )
This
new electrical force effect was a preeminent discovery of great
historical significance. Despite his fact, few academicians grasped its
significance as such. Focused now on dogmatizing Maxwell’s work, they
could not accept Tesla’s excited announcements. Academes argued that
Tesla’s effect could not exist. They insisted that Tesla revise his
statements.
Tesla’s
mysterious effect could not have been predicted by Maxwell because
Maxwell did not incorporate it when formulating His equations. How
could he have done so, when the phenomenon was just discovered? Tesla
now pondered the academic ramifications of this new effect. What then
of his own and possibly other electrical phenomena which were not
incorporated into Maxwell’s force laws? Would academes now ignore their
existence? Would they now even dare to reject the possibility of such
phenomena on the basis of an incomplete mathematical description?
http://journal.borderlands.com/2010/the-broadcast-power-of-nikola-tesla-part-2/
These
radiant fields operated at far greater power than before. Strange
effects were suddenly appearing at certain distances from the magnetic
impulser. For one thing, Tesla noticed that metallic surfaces near the
impulser became covered with white brush-like corona discharges. While
the sparks played in trails across the metal surfaces, Tesla observed
physical movement among the metal objects. Tensions and rocking
motions. Both phenomena occurring simultaneously, he was utterly
fascinated. The sparks themselves seemed alive. The moving metal
objects seemed to suggest new motor effects.
"Propellant-less
Electromagnetic Propulsion", Stavros G. Dimitriou, Dr. David
King http://jnaudin.free.fr/stvdmdoc/prplessp.htm
"The electric
waveforms used to generate the
vectors of velocity and/or acceleration must have dissimilar slopes
between the ascending and descending part of the signal. This is
necessary in order to obtain a non-zero sum of the derivatives per
period. Extensive analysis has been carried in [1] to optimize the
parameters pertaining to each particular waveform.
The efficiency of the electrically generating domains of velocity and
acceleration depends on the dimensions of the generating element, with
regard to the fundamental wavelength of the waveform applied to it, as
stated above."
"On the Existence of
Undistorted Progressive Waves
(UPWs) of Arbitrary Speeds 0Ł v < Ą in Nature", Waldyr A. Rodrigues Jr. ,
Jian-Yu Lu (1997) Foundations of Physics, Vol. 27, No.3, p. 435-508
(1997) http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/BF02550165.pdf#page-2
"Considerations
on
Undistorted-Progressive X-Waves and Davydov Solitons,
Frohlich-Bose-Einstein Condensation, and Cherenkov-like effect in
Biosystems", Marcus V. Mesquita, Aurea R. Vasconcellos, and Roberto
Luzzi (3 June, 2003)
http://www.sbfisica.org.br/bjp/files/v34_489.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_antenna
, http://www.freepatentsonline.com/1309031.pdf
Speculation
on Potential Uses of Antigravity
A lot of
people think antigravity is a
joke, and so any uses of it are therefore purely imaginative. However,
they might change their minds if they read the following:
"United States
gravity control propulsion
research", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_gravity_control_propulsion_initiative
"Emerging
Possibilities for Space Propulsion
Breakthroughs", Marc G. Millis (1995)
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/technology/warp/ipspaper_prt.htm
"Conquest
of Gravity Aim of Top Scientists in
U.S.", New York Herald-Tribune, Sunday, November 20, 1955, http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/secret_projects/project048.htm
.
"UFOs Merit Scientific Study", Hynek JA, Science. 1966 Oct
21;154(3747):329. PubMed PMID: 17751686.
http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc597.htm
"I Know The Secret Of The Flying Saucers" by Maj. Donald E. Keyhoe,
USMC (Ret.) (1966) http://www.nicap.org/iknow.htm
A very interesting partial:
"With
a real all-out effort this could happen a lot sooner than the 10 or 20
years many scientists have in mind.
But
getting enough top men to work in the field is a problem. One scientist
says, "Scientists are sensitive about their reputations and many of
them still think antigravity is a joke. If they knew the facts, they’d
be eager to get into it."
Fear
among scientists is partially due to the Air force censorship of UFO
reports. Air force censors not only hide the facts but also belittle
those who publicly report UFO sightings. . . .
But
AF policy notwithstanding, the drive to get the secret of antigravity
is well underway. It can’t be stopped now. But it can be
speeded up. We are already spending billions on the space program – on
the race to the moon, to Mars. Harnessing gravity could put us years
ahead and save us enormous sums of money.
With
control of the universe at stake, a crash program is imperative. We
produced the A-bomb, under the huge Manhattan Project, in an amazingly
short time. The needs, the urgency today are even greater. The Air
Force should end UFO secrecy, give the facts to scientists, the public,
to Congress. Once the people realize the truth, they would back – even
demand – a crash G program.
For
this is one race we dare not lose. – Maj.
Donald E. Keyhoe" (1966)
"
"Outside the Box" Space and
Terrestrial Transportation and Energy Technologies for the 21st
Century", Theodore C. Loder, III (2002)
Abstract
: "This paper reviews the development of antigravity research in the US
and notes how research activity seemed to disappear by the mid 1950s.
It then addresses recently reported scientific findings and witness
testimonies - that show us that this research and technology is alive
and well and very advanced. The revelations of findings in this area
will alter dramatically our 20th century view of physics and technology
and must be considered in planning for both energy and transportation
needs in the 21st century. "
"How To Investigate a Flying Saucer", Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
(January 2016)
https://www.cia.gov/news-information/featured-story-archive/2016-featured-story-archive/how-to-investigate-a-flying-saucer.html
". . . the
CIA and USAF have learned a thing or two about how to investigate a UFO
sighting. While most government officials and scientists now dismiss
flying saucer reports as a quaint relic of the 1950s and 1960s, there’s
still a lot that can be learned from the history and methodology of
“flying saucer intelligence.” "
The article lists "10
Tips When Investigating a Flying Saucer". The methodology is
conventional and sound, but the odd thing about this article is that
the CIA seems to be
recommending these procedures to the general public
for the purpose of investigating UFO sightings. That would have made
sense back in 1952 when the "Flying Saucers Problem" was a hot
and openly discussed topic ( http://www.foia.cia.gov/sites/default/files/document_conversions/89801/DOC_0000015344.pdf
) . But why now in 2016? This topic has been
marginalized
and ridiculed for decades. This now seems to lend it a degree
of
official respectability. And the recommendation to "Consult
with
experts" will become an invitation to stir the witch's brew
as
the questions won't just be about photography, weather balloons, and
swamp gas. (See UFO Physics,
below; also the CIA has, in the past, encouraged reports of UFO
sightings as a cover for the U2 program. See "6
decades of
UFO sightings & Evidence", Nick Cook https://youtu.be/cSCMhDEecQM
1:40:53)
"Secrets
of the Saucer Scientists", William F. Hamilton
III http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc1756.htm
Project
Greenglow http://projectavalon.net/forum/showthread.php?t=9386
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/
"Anitgravity
update" N'Elkan Institute
(2012) http://www.nelkan.com/institute/winning-the-human-race/
Antigravity
is no joke. This is serious
stuff.
_____
The term
"antigravity" as used below is
defined as:
The
ability by technical
means to exert a mechanical push or pull on a target object
of any material composition located at a distance without actually
touching it with radiation, particles, or electric or magnetic fields.
The mechanical effect "propagates" instantaneously and does not show
wavelength, phase, or aberration effects like light. The effect can be
focused, shaped, or concentrated in some manner, as is currently done
with magnetic or electric fields, but not in the manner done with light
or electromagnetic radiation. The effect can produce self-levitation or
self-propulsion when applied back upon the mechanism generating the
effect (a.k.a. non-Newtonian "bootstrapping"). Additionally, generation
of the effect might involve a
non-Newtonian radial reaction confined within the generating
apparatus.
The term
"field propulsion" is probably
preferable to the more popular term "antigravity", as the latter
implies that a gravitatonal field (e.g., from a planet) is
necessary for propulsion. A field propulsion system would work just as
well in deep intergalactic space. Rocket propulsion is like
someone sitting in a boat and throwing bricks out the back end to get
the boat to move. Field propulsion, in contrast, is like someone
dipping oars directly into the water and exerting a force directly on
the medium. The medium in this case is the fundamental space/time (not
"space-time") structure of the physical Universe itself.
Hundreds
of years
ago, electric and magnetic phenomena were thought to be unrelated. But
the later experiments of Gauss, Faraday, Maxwell and many other
investigators showed that they are actually related in very definite
ways. Nowadays conventional science suspects that the
gravitational field is also somehow related to electric and magnetic
fields. But modern progress in this area has been minimal, and
gravitation remains an oddball that has not been "unified" with the
other fields.
The
various articles
above suggest that there is a clear dimensional relationship between
electric (t1/s1),
magnetic (t2/s2) and
gravitational (t3/s3)
fields. These fields were treated as multidimensional motions
(space/time ratios) rather than as some sort of mysterious
action-at-a-distance effect. In principle, the concept of motion is
completely understandable by the human mind. In practice, particularly
as used here, some education of our intuition is definitely
required. Motion of our ordinary experience is expressed as
s/t; this could be the motion of a raindrop falling through
the atmosphere. Motion expressed as s2/t
would be like the motion of dots on the surface of an expanding sheet
of rubber, or the motion of picture elements as a camera zooms in on a
scene. Motion of the t/s form has no "path" in space, and requires
"field equations" for its description. Rotational motions of either the
s/t form or the t/s form are much less intuitive, as are combinations
of "motions-of-motions" like momentum (t2/s2)
which is a combination of linear spatial motion (velocity) and
rotational temporal motion (mass). Every physical property can be
expressed as some sort of space/time ratio (see article).
As
you can see, the
concepts can get messy very quickly, but with better exposition, better
examples, more comprehensive equations, better experimental insights,
etc., we should still be able to understand these things. They are not
inherently beyond our comprehension.
We have
already seen that mass (t3/s3)
can be combined with electron current (space per time) to give a
resultant magnetic field: (t3/s3)(s/t)
= (t2/s2)
Note that the field remains "bound" to the mass that is so treated. The
big questions implied now are:
1. Can mass
be combined with yet another kind of motion so that its interaction
with other masses becomes repulsive instead of attractive? Rotation, or
combinations of rotations, would be a good candidate for investigation.
See effects
of spinning an ordinary object. Other possibilities involve
rotating magnetic fields, or asymmetrically pulsed monopolar electric
fields.
2. Can
concepts like permittivity and
permeability be extended to some kind of "gravity saturable" material?
*
3. Are
there special materials (akin
to dielectric and ferromagnetic materials) that can facilitate the
utilization of such a property? If "nuclear spin" is involved
in this, for example, then it might be productive to see how something
like deuterium would respond to special configurations of electric and
magnetic fields. A deuteron has a spin of +1, making it a boson. (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterium#Spin_and_energy
) Bosons tend to clump into the same state—a trait that might be useful in this
connection. But non-local physics (time/space) is so different from
local physics (space/time) that even conceiving of a machine to utilize
this trait for such a purpose would be difficult for us denizens of
locality. Physicists will probably see the effect as an "anomaly"
produced by an accidental and "useless" configuration of fields. (See Piggott for an example)
Other
possibilities involve super- or
hyperdeformed nuclei or excited spin states:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdeformation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperdeformation
http://www.webelements.com/gadolinium/isotopes.html
http://www.webelements.com/terbium/isotopes.html
http://www.webelements.com/dysprosium/isotopes.html
http://www.webelements.com/mercury/isotopes.html
http://www.physics.fsu.edu/GS10Yr/FallonNS06.pdf
"From Single-Particle to Superdeformed: a Multitude of Shapes in
MERCURY-191 and a New Region of Superdeformation",
Ye, Danzhao (1991) Dissertation Abstracts
International, Volume: 52-06, Section: B, page: 3125.
"Superdeformed
bands in 150Gd and 151Tb: Evidence for
the influence of high-N intruder states at large deformations" P.
Fallon, A. Alderson, M.A. Bentley, A.M. Bruce, P.D. Forsyth, D. Howe,
J.W. Roberts, J.F. Sharpey-Schafer, P.J. Twin, F.A. Beck, T. Byrski, D.
Curien, C. Schuck Pages 137-142 Physics Letters B,
Volume 218, Issue 2, Pages 119-262 (16 February 1989) [The article says
that in some element isotopes, the values of dynamic moments of inertia
are high at low spin speeds and decrease rapidly at high spin speeds
Gadolinium150, Terbium151, but for others (Dysprosium) they are almost
constant.]
"Nuclear
Moments of Inertia at High Spin, M. A.
Deleplanque (1982) http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/6593868-XcDoVC/6593868.pdf
*
"Guidelines
to Antigravity", Robert L. Forward, Hughes Research
Laboratories, Malibu, California, American Journal of Physics,
Vol. 31, No. 3, 166-170, March, 1963 (Received 12 September 1962)
http://www.academia.edu/3336384/Antigravity_-_by_Robert_L.Forward
"In
studying analogies between electromagnetism and gravitation, it can be
seen that one analogous quantity has not been investigated. This is the
gravitational equivalent to the magnetic permeability. Electrical power
distribution systems depend upon the anomalously large and nonlinear
permeability of iron and othermagnetic materials. Since all atoms have
spin, all materials will have a gravitational permeability which is
different from that of free space. Rough calculations show that this
difference is very small, but experimental investigation may find
materials with anomalously large or non-linear properties that can be
used to enhance time-varying gravitational fields. Also, since the
magnetic moment and the inertial moment are combined in an atom, it may
be possible to use this property to convert time-varying
electromagnetic fields into time-varying gravitational fields."
Actual
experiments
suggest that antigravity is definitely within reach of the technology
available today, and might even be closer than most of us think. Fuller
development of this technological capability will have many
applications and many serious implications. I list a few of
the more interesting ones below (construction equipment, terrorism,
cheating at sports, etc., have not been included):
-
Safe,
inexpensive access to space:
Access to low Earth orbit presently costs about $10,000 per
pound of payload. Hazardous propellants, special launch facilities,
extensive ground crews and supporting equipment are required.
The launch vehicles are not readily reusable like a commercial
airliner. A propulsion system based on antigravity would strongly
reduce launch costs, perhaps to less than $1 per pound. Both launch and
re-entry could be done at low speeds, greatly reducing risks. Access to
low earth orbit would become as routine as ordinary intercontinental
commercial air flights are today. Weight would
apparently not be a problem; the kind of forces involved in such a
propulsion system are 1040 stronger than
gravity. Hovering over a location could be done without expenditure of
energy (work is defined as force moving through a distance; how much
energy does the Sun expend keeping the Earth in orbit?).
-
Access
to the stars directly from earth:
With antigravity, flight to the stars and planets could be done
directly from Earth without any need for intermediate bases on the Moon
or Mars. Complete spacecraft could be assembled and provisioned here on
Earth, instead of in space.
-
Adjustment
of satellite orbits directly from Earth:
Communication satellites in synchronous orbits need small
"station keeping" adjustments periodically. With antigravity as a
maneuvering system, these adjustments could be done indefinitely
because there is no depletion of propellant. Satellite orbits could
also be altered by beaming a push or a pull from Earth, although this
would require very precise aiming capability and probably several
widely-separated beam sources.
-
Disposal
of space junk: Close
Earth orbit currently has thousands of pieces of "space junk" flying
around at very high speeds. With Earth-based antigravity, this junk
could easily be de-orbited and allowed to burn up in the atmosphere.
-
Direct
production of motion:
motion can be produced directly with this technology. There
is no need for gears, bearings, cranks, pistons, turbine blades,
wheels, lubricants, rockets, etc. Friction would be minimal and
conversion efficiences very high. Basic machines would be simple and
easy to manufacture.
-
Advanced
personal transportation:
With antigravity, you could drive your
vehicle
anywhere in the world (even across oceans) on electronically defined
paths. Such a vehicle could move in outer space as well as under the
ocean. Speeds could be high. Distances to shopping centers would become
trivial, even if hundreds of miles away from home. Roads would not be
needed. The real estate market would be drastically altered.
-
Control
of weather: Use of antigravity would allow us to move
hurricanes, tornadoes, deflect floods, and blow back forest fires.
-
Create
perfect vacuum pumps: Even
a weak antigravity field could be used to sweep residual air molecules
remaining at high vacuum into a collection port where they would be
removed by a conventional turbo-molecular pump. Almost perfect vacuums
would be obtainable even in large and slightly leaky vessels (A single
finger print on the wall of a high-vacuum vessel can require 24 hours
for the removal of volatile components).
-
Suppression
of aircraft sonic booms: A
high-speed antigravity craft could be configured to move the air out of
its forward path such that the air becomes increasingly rarefied nearer
the craft. A sonic boom could not develop with such a configuration.
Additionally, ordinary aircraft are supported by a pressure wave, which
makes the magnitude of the sonic boom proportional to aircraft weight.
But this would not be true of an antigravity craft, which gets its
"lift" from a completely different source. (See http://www.answers.com/topic/sonic-boom
Sonic boom suppression is already possible today through the use of
electric fields; see
article)
-
Long-range
navigational deflection for spacecraft:
A spacecraft moving at the
speed of
light could clear the path ahead of it. Interstellar space is
generally quite empty, but even micron sized particles could pose a
hazard to spacecraft moving at these speeds. High speed impacts by gas
molecules could result in structural erosion, as well as collision
generated gamma radiation which would be hazardous to the crew and
electronics (like living inside of a particle accelerator).
Another problem is ambient light. At relativistic
speeds, microwaves and ambient starlight, X-rays, and gamma rays will
be blue shifted to higher energies
as viewed in the forward direction from a spacecraft. This,
combined with the relativistic headlight effect ,
could make for a formidable heating effect.
-
Short-range thermal
insulation for spacecraft: A spacecraft
exploring a planet with a hot, corrosive atmosphere (like Venus) could
insulate itself by repelling all external gas molecules away from its
hull. This would be equivalent to placing the spacecraft inside a
vacuum bottle.
-
Instantaneous
interstellar communication: Antigravity, as
defined above, could be used for instantaneous communication over
distances of light years. Instantaneous interstellar communication is
probably best accomplished with the currently envisioned schemes that
use "entangled" photons. Communication channels that use gravitational
pulses would have relatively low bandwidth but would not require
prepositioning of special equipment containing precorrelated photons.
-
Alteration
of planetary orbits: The
ellipticity, revolution rate, rotation rate, and polar orientation of a
planet (or moon) could be altered by the use of antigravity technology.
-
Manipulation
of light: Antigravity technology would be able to create
concentrated, extremely powerful gravitational fields. The effects
should be strong enough to readily bend a beam of light. This opens up
all sorts of possibilities in the science of optics:
Gamma
ray focusing: Currently X-rays can be focused by grazing
incidence mirrors. I know of no such devices for gamma rays, which have
much higher energies.
Giant aperture telescopes: In
our huge universe, light is actually rather slow. Why bother with
telescopes if we can just send a probe there and back at speeds much
faster than light? One answer is that light carries a lot of
useful information, and large surveys can be done rapidly from
telescopes on Earth. Antigravity will not make telescopes obsolete, but
might be used to enhance their resolving power and extend the available
spectrum.
Cloaking:
It is probably possible to bend light around an object such that the
light "flows" in a streamlined fashion. If so, the object would become
invisible, at least from one point of view. Shielding a spacecraft from
gamma rays might also be possible.
An interesting but different method of cloaking by
the use of metamaterials can be found at::
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12961080/
by Alan Boyle, Science editor, MSNBC:
"Here's
how to make an invisibility cloak. Theoretical cloaking device
could soon beocme reality (sort of)"
"The black lines in this drawing show the path
that light rays would take
through a theoretical cloaking device. The device's
metamaterial would be
patterned in such a way to route the rays around the cloaked sphere."
1949, Norwood, Ohio Searchlight
UFO Incident
"An
additional photo was found in the possession of RAY STANFORD, who
states: "This is several generations down from the original16 mm movie
film, but it seems to rather clearly show that while the beam was
projecting several degrees away from the object, when it got within a
certain event horizon of the object, it was simply bent or 'pulled' the
beam directly into the object, seemingly bending it about26.5 degrees,
as measured in the photo plane! This frame has always amazed me since I
first saw it in the mid-'50s. Several persons, back then, who had seen
the actual movie said that at one time the object seems, indeed, to
'suck' the beam squarely into it! " http://www.ufocasebook.com/1949norwoodufo.html
(Note:
in the photo, the searchlight beam starts at the lower left and the UFO
is at the upper right. The beam should have shot past the UFO, but
instead seems to get completely 'pulled' into it.)
"Also,
in several cases, light (e.g. from car headlights or beaming
spotlights) is reported to "bend" in front of the UFO . . ."
http://www.hyper.net/ufo/physics.html
by Dimitris
Hatzopoulos
|
-
Extreme
pressure
experiments:
Antigravity fields could be shaped with techniques analogous to what is
done today with electric and magnetic fields, except that the effect is
expected to be much more compact. Because the primary effect is
mechanical, it should be possible to make devices that can produce
extreme pressures. This capability could be used to study material at
extreme densities (such as that inside the Earth or stars). Because
physical-mechanical contact is not necessary, experiments can use BOTH
extreme temperatures and extreme pressures. This capability
may also make certain industrial processes more economical, such as
chemical process operations that use supercritical solvents ( http://www.isopro.net/web8.htm
), or for making large diamonds for heatsinks and lenses, or for making
high energy-density explosives. (See: "Nitrogen Power: New crystal
packs a lot of punch", Alexandra Goho, Science News, July 17, 2004,
Vol. 166, p.36-37, www.sciencenews.org/articles/20040717/fob4.asp
and high
energy-density materials
; "Gravity Control by means of Electromagnetic
Field
through Gas or Plasma at Ultra-Low Pressure", Fran De Aquino
(2007-210) ". . .it is also possible to build a Gravitational Press of
ultra-high pressure . . ." https://arxiv.org/vc/physics/papers/0701/0701091v7.pdf
p.16
"Hypergravity
helping aircraft fly further", Phys.org (2012) ["using
titanium aluminide would reduce their weight by 45% over traditional
components"] http://phys.org/news/2012-11-hypergravity-aircraft.html
If that seems too hard to imagine,
see what can already be done with a powerful magnetic field. This link
shows how a magnetic field can be used to shrink a U.S. metal
coin to about 75% of its original diameter: http://www.magnet.fsu.edu/education/tutorials/slideshows/shrinkingquarter/index.html
. The gravitational version of this experiment would be continuous,
rather than pulsed, and far more powerful. (See also "Electromagnetic
hammer" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5inJ7sDndBI&feature=related
)
-
Deep
sea exploration: A
vessel designed for deep sea exploration could fly from an inland base
directly to the destination, submerge, and begin exploration. No
support from a surface vessel would be needed. No propellers would be
needed either because the propulsion system would be contained entirely
inside the submersible. Such a vessel would be safer, require less
maintenance, and be far more convenient to use than those available
today.
-
Industrial
processing: Any industrial process that uses
gravity or centrifugal separators to separate materials might benefit
from a perfected antigravity technology. This would be especially true
for substances that have only slight differences in densities such as
atomic isotopes. (of interest: http://techxplore.com/news/2017-01-whirligig-toy-bioengineers-cent-hand-powered.html
)
-
Medical
uses: A rotationless centrifuge could be used for
separation of serum components and faster measurements of sedimentation
rates. Non-contact levitation of patients (e.g.: burn victims) might
also be possible.
-
Clearing
of mine fields: Land mines could be
exploded remotely. Suppressing or containing the effects of the
explosion would also be possible.
-
Pop-in
reconnaissance: An antigravity craft
would be able to move with very high speeds and very high
accelerations. Conceivably, it should be able to "pop-in" noiselessly
at a target location, take a bunch of photos, and then suddenly depart —all within a few tenths of a second.
Such a visit would be hard to detect visually. Observers who witnessed
the visit might not be sure of what they saw, especially at night, and
especially if there were some manufactured distractions.
-
Missile
shield/satellite killer/asteroid deflector:
A target that is hit with a powerful, rod-shaped antigravity beam will
experience high shear forces unless the beam envelopes the entire
target. The effect would be like shooting a thin walled tube through a
layer cake; a "plug" of all layers would be expelled intact, leaving a
clean hole through the cake. This would certainly disrupt the operation
of the missile or satellite (or spacecraft, or building, underground
bunker, etc). A less powerful beam would simply damage it or push it
away or alter its trajectory. The latter could be used to alter the
incoming trajectory of a rogue meteor or asteroid, thereby avoiding
catastrophic damage to structures on the ground. Only a few hours of
warning would be needed.
- Mega-gravity:
This is the opposite of antigravity. It is a technology that would
presumably be possible when the science of antigravity is figured out.
It could be used to make the weight of something much
greater than normal. Obvious applications would be motionless
centrifuges and vacuum pumps, industrial processes that require extreme
pressure. Artificial gravity for spacecraft
interiors should also be possible.
-
Utilization
of Non-local effects: It is reasonable to
assume that non-local effects would accompany the "territory"
of antigravity phenomena. It is not clear just what they would be, but
might include "anomalous mixing of materials", "disintegrator beams",
and "delocalization of objects" (meaning that they become invisible, or
seemingly immaterial or spatially non-contiguous, wholly or partially).
Spatial "blackout" effects might also be observable.
I think one of the
best applications will be a startlingly new type of remote sensing. I
am struggling with how to illustrate this. Perhaps these thoughts will
help. Our perception depends on how an observer's motion couples to the
motion of the object he is trying to perceive. If the observer is
stationary and looks at an airplane propeller mounted on an airplane
wing, he can see it clearly if it is stationary as well. But if it is
rotating, it becomes nearly invisible. However, if we set up a camera,
give it the characteristics of the human eye, and then rotate it to
give it the kind of motion possessed by the rotating
propeller, the propeller becomes visible again. But other things
disappear. The wing and background, for instance, cannot be seen
anymore. Some parts may be visible in either system; the engine
cowling, which may have a rotational symmetry, may still be visible (an
effect that might baffle the observer). (Compare medical
X-ray stratigraphy. See "Medical X-Ray
Techniques In Diagnostic Radiology", G.J.van
der Plaats, P. Vijlbrief http://www.amazon.com/Medical-X-Ray-Techniques-Diagnostic-Radiology...
page 261, "Special Radiographic Techniques" )
Suppose now we attach
temporal motion to an object, say, by means of powerful, specially
configured electrical and magnetic fields. The object now has a
different type of motion than the observer has, and it can disappear
from view. But it is not just optically invisible. It has actually
"delocalized"; it is not "there" anymore as a spatially contiguous
physical object. It has shifted to a "when" type of location
while the observer is in a "where" type of reference system. If we
could invent a special camera with the same kind of temporal motion,
this delocalized object would become visible. But all the normal
spatial stuff would become invisible. This implies that you could see
right through a building, maybe even a planet. Temporal structures
would become visible and the normal spatial structures would become
transparent. This could lead to a fantastic new form of remote sensing.
(Is this what UFOs are doing when they are seen
leisurely hovering near the ground? . . . taking a survey of structures
with temporal signatures?)
Possibly relevant:
Transparent UFOs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlLN_Jcg1pc&feature=player_embedded#t=157
http://unitedstatesufo.blogspot.com/2011/12/semi-transparent-long-tubular-ufo.html
; http://www.examiner.com/article/colorado-couple-v-shaped-semi-transparent-ufo-flew-low-and-silent
; http://the-v-factor-paranormal.blogspot.com/2012/02/huge-semi-transparent-v-shaped-ufo-over.html
http://ufodigest.com/article/illinois-witnesses-watch-triangle-ufo-become-transparent
"UFO NEWS 2014 UFO
ENCOUNTER JUNE 10 1931 82414" http://nyufo.bravesites.com/entries/ufo-news/ufo-news-2014-ufo-encounter-june-10-1931-82414-
, http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread600397/pg1
Compare
similarities: http://www.ufoevidence.org/topics/hudsonvalley.htm
; http://www.chron.com/news/nation-world/space/article/Mystery-lights-over-Houston-keep-people-talking-5691206.php
; http://www.syracusenewtimes.com/26-july-2014-ufo-new-york-lights/
See also
the links listed in The Hutchison Effect.
If you have
trouble with the mental gymnastics of comprehending how something would
appear in a different reference system, consider the technology of holography,
spread
spectrum signaling, and cryptography.
These convert ordinary comprehensible images or information into
"noise". The information still exists in an intact, definite, form
however, and can be converted back into its original form with the
proper equipment and algorithms. Similarly, the link between a "where"
type of reference system and a "when" type of reference
system is encoded in the motion
used to convert from a gravitational reference system to some other
kind of system. The key question is: What type of momentum,
temporal or spatial, is the object taking on relative to the reference
system?
Another possible
application is instantaneous communication. A message can be "written"
directly at the destination without having to transmit it through
intervening space. Likewise, a "bomb" ("bundle of energy"?) could be
delivered to a destination without traversing the intervening space (a
rather scary prospect!). See also GammaBurster
. Presumably, physical objects could be transferred in a similar manner
(e.g.: UFOs would not need doors for occupant entry/exit.) See also Ball
Lightning ("Some appear within buildings passing through
closed doors and windows. Some have appeared within metal
aircraft and have entered and left without causing damage")
Rapid construction of
tunnels might be another application. The "dirt" is simply delocalized
(scattered to different where/when locations in the Universe). Huge
tunnels and caverns could be made without having to haul away dirt or
rock.
There are thoughts
even today about using non-local effects for remote sensing:
Because
time and gravity are innately linked . . . researchers would be able to
use a clock as a sort of scale, correlating subtle fluctuation in a
clock's ticking rate with the mass below it. Clocks flying above enemy
territory could detect missing mass below the surface—perhaps the
location of a secret underground tunnel or cave. ("Quantum
Timekeeping", Andrew Grant, Science News, March
8, 2014, p. 22
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/quantum-timekeeping
)
Non-local
effects are not limited by spatial contact or spatial
proximity or spatial barriers. This opens up a completely new way to
manipulate things in our physical universe (even including atomic
structure). To most of us, such effects will seem magical and almost
beyond belief. (See also: In Search of the Geometry of
Space, Time, and Motion, Speed of Gravity,
Speed
of Electric Fields )
See also http://georesonance.com/
"If not
us, someone else will lead in the exploration, utilization and,
ultimately, the commercialization of space, as we sit idly by."
A
Journey to Inspire, Innovate and Discover [by
using obsolescent technology], p. 12,
June 2004, http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/60736main_M2M_report_small.pdf
"This was a failure of policy, management,
capability,
and above all, a failure of imagination."
—Tom Kean, chairman of
the commission investigating
the September 11, 2001, attacks
"Boldly go where no
man has gone before." —Star Fleet
"Look with favor upon a bold beginning." —Virgil
html 7/2004
__________
What is a
UFO?
"The Battle Of Los Angeles"
Test your opinion
about "What is a UFO?" by reading about "The Battle Of Los Angeles" ( http://www.rense.com/ufo/battleofla.htm
, http://www.militarymuseum.org/BattleofLA.html
, http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Battle_of_Los_Angeles
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAag2hn2w-w&feature=youtu.be
http://youtu.be/1rv9Fpp2eQA
). On February 25, 1942, around 3 a.m., a UFO was
sighted
over Los Angeles, California The Army fired 1,430
rounds of antiaircraft shells at it with no effect on the object. About
100,000 or more people witnessed the incident. What do you think it was?
http://www.militarymuseum.org/BattleofLA.html
Mystery Air Objects Seen In Sky over
L.A.
This is another report of widespread
sightings of UFOs in the southern California area on November 6, 1957.
You can read the details at http://www.ufocasebook.com/2009/la1957.html
.
http://www.ufocasebook.com/2009/la1957.html
Washington
D.C. UFO incident
Also well-publicized
was a series of UFO sightings in Washington, D.C. during July 1952:
"The sightings of
July 19–20, 1952, made front-page headlines in newspapers around the
nation."
"UFO over Washington
DC. Film Footage from 1952" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTZ7O9cfpPQ
:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTZ7O9cfpPQ
"The capabilities of
the UFOs were far beyond our technological proficiency at the time.
By the time our first missions were off the ground, the UFOs were
nowhere to be seen. But, when our planes returned to ground, the UFOs
were back, as if taunting our defenses. For hours, U.S. planes chased
the illusive targets, yet without success. Pilots could actually see
the perplexing objects, but as they approached, the lights of the UFOs
vanished."
"Washington DC UFO
Merry go round" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S75oeBhhAbI&feature=player_embedded
UFO
Sightings
Washington DC. July 12 1952 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hObI12DD3-Y&feature=player_embedded
Invasion Washington: UFOs Over the
Capitol,
Kevin
D. Randle (2001)
"First
Contact Special Edition: 1952 UFO Eyewitness Howard Cocklin", http://youtu.be/UQwwl1ln30Y
The Legacy of 1952: Year of the UFO, by Dr. Bruce Maccabee Ph.D.Paperback – July 29, 2018 ( Amazon )
Farmington
UFO
Armada:
The
Farmington Daily Times
March 18, 1950
A peculiar
thing
about most UFO sightings is that there is no follow up. They
may be front-page headline news one day, but virtually
nothing the next. It is as though you hear an announcement on
TV that "UFOs land on White House Lawn. President greets
space aliens. And now for your local weather
report. " It seems that this sort of news is very carefully managed.
We are only allowed to know just so much, and nothing more.
If you are searching for
information on UFOs, be aware that the names have been changed:
UFOs are now "Unidentified Arial Phenomena" or
"unconventional aircraft" or "unconventional helicopters",
etc. This change helps to abandon the popular connection
between "UFOs" and "space aliens". Pilots and other
observers are more willing to file reports on UAPs than on UFOs. If you
are filing inquiries under the Freedom of Infomation Act, you need to
play "exact word games". The authorities no longer investigate
so-called "UFOs".
Some believe that these
objects are man-made, being a secret Nazi technology within a secret
society (or civilization) that survived WW II. What
do you think?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:George_Adamski_ship_1.jpg (Alleged photo of Haunebu
II UFO from 1952)
http://www.adamskifoundation.com/html/AboutGA.htm
(Attributed
opinions about authenticity)
Hitler's
Flying Saucers -A Guide to German Flying Discs of the Second World War,
Henry Stevens (2003)
http://www.tiono.com/model/FlyingSaucers.pdf
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ufo_aleman/rfz/
"Because
the object is
unidentified, the object's source is also undetermined. Only a leap of
faith can connect UFOs to an extraterrestrial course without first
introducing proof. A radical hypothesis such as an extraterrestrial
origin of UFOs requires overwhelming proof in order to be generally
accepted. No such overwhelming extraterrestrial proof has ever been
offered which has stood up to scrutiny. No crashed alien craft have
ever been produced by anyone, inside or outside government. Likewise,
no alien bodies have ever been found. No extraterrestrial culture, or
alien technology has ever been uncovered by anyone. There is simply no actual evidence at all linking UFOs
with an extraterrestrial source. Therefore, no such leap of faith
should be made. We need to start all over again. All rational earthly
explanations need to be exhausted before any extraterrestrial theories
are even put forth.
Unfortunately,
the
simple truth is that, for the most part, UFO research has done a
leap-frog to the extraterrestrial explanation without ever adequately
exploring and exhausting a terrestrial origin. This statement is
inclusive of everyone regardless of background or education. It applies
to the charlatan UFO attention getters as well as to former NASA
scientists with Ph.D.s. This is the condition of our current state of
affairs in the UFO world.
. . .
Already in this brief discussion, the
evidence, taken as a whole, is overwhelming. Please compare this to any
and all extraterrestrial explanations of flying saucers. Here we have
Germans who claim to have invented the idea of the flying saucer. We
have Germans who claim to have designed flying saucers. We have Germans
who claim to have built flying saucers. We have Germans who claim to
have flown flying saucers. We have Germans who claim to be witnesses to
flying saucers known beforehand to be of German construction. We have
German construction details. And finally, we have a man who took
pictures of a known German flying saucer in flight. The facts speak for
themselves. During the Second World War the Germans built devices we
would all call today "flying saucers". No other UFO explanation can
even approach this in terms of level of proof." (Hitler's
Flying Saucers -A Guide to German Flying Discs of the Second World War,
Henry Stevens (2003) http://www.tiono.com/model/FlyingSaucers.pdf
)
(My aside regarding a
standard of proof: I can truthfully say that I have touched a
piece of the moon (obviously extraterrestrial). I did it when
I visited the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C. decades
ago. A little piece of moon rock was on display for people
to touch. I thought "Who would want to touch a piece of rock from the
Moon?" But no one was in line, and so I went over and touched
it, just so I could say I did. Millions of other people have
done the same. Can we do the same kind of thing for
"extraterrestrial UFO artifacts"? Can you go to a museum and touch an
extraterrestrial UFO seat cushion, or a star map, a family photo, a
charm, a glove . . . anything?
Collecting data on
UFO sightings is in an altogether different category. Collecting data
on sightings is loosely like an astronomer collecting data on supernova
explosions, except that the astromomer's data is much more precise, and
he understands the object of his study. Neither can be called
"laboratory experiments", but eventually, commonalities will show up in
the data sets, and some conclusions can be drawn.
Originally I thought
UFOs were a kind of silly, "fringe" topic, evoking images like those
on the front page of National Enquirer titled
"President consults with space aliens"—ridiculous
stuff I see at the checkout stand. Indeed, I had
browsed through one supposedly authoritative book on free energy
devices, but it was full of obfuscatory impressive-sounding
technobabble and was scientifically useless. Still, my studies in
quantum mechanics and electromagnetics suggested that antigravity ought
to be doable, and, once we figure it out, easily doable
at that! And if I could develop these insights, surely
someone else could too. But if it is so easy, why aren't numerous
people building these machines? Why aren't UFOs being seen
all over the world and reported in the newspapers?
Normally, science
depends on open discourse and discovery for its progress. But this is
not the case with military science. Advanced developments will be kept
secret for military advantage. Hence, two versions of science develop
in parallel: one for public consumption and another for the military
(usually accessible only on a "need to know" basis). When the public
version catches up to the military version, the latter can be
declassified and become public. UFOs then, could be a manifestation of
a deep, dark, secret research project, possibly military in
character. Reluctantly, I decided I had to look into this topic—one that no physicist
would touch—expecting to sift
through a lot of "nut case" literature just to see what I could find.
To my utter surprise, some of the literature on this topic turned out
to be quite well-researched and carefully reasoned (though
necessarily somewhat speculative). I started with Hitler's
Suppressed and Still Secret Weapons, Science and Technology
by Henry Stevens, quoted above. Works by various other authors are
listed below.)
See also:
"Unacknowledged
special access programs", Joël van der Reijden
(2005) http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_usap.htm
"Top Secret Black Projects – Unacknowledged
Special
Access Programs", http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread613064/pg1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_access_program
Dark Star,
Henry Stevens (2011)
http://www.amazon.com/Dark-Star-Hidden-History-U-Boats/dp/193548740X#reader_B005LQQWU0
Hitler's
Suppressed and Still Secret Weapons, Science and Technology,
Henry Stevens ( 2007) http://www.amazon.com/Hitlers-Suppressed-Still-Secret-Weapons-Technology/dp/1931882738#reader_1931882738
(My
review: these are both very well researched, thought-provoking books
and are well worth reading.)
Reich of
the Black Sun, Joseph P. Farrell (2004)
The SS Brotherhood of the Bell, Joseph
P.
Farrell (2006) My review: These highly interesting and well written
books (usual misspellings excepted) describe various facts, legends,
history, suppositions, etc. of the Nazi SS super high technology
"wonder weapons" development during and somewhat after World War II.
The Nazis apparently had built atom bombs
but the war ended before they were able to deploy them. They were also
working on other weapons that had far more terrifying and powerful
capabilities, ones that would make the atom bomb seem feeble:
"This could only mean
that there was a weapons system that possessed enormous range and
degree of efficiency that lay beyond the nuclear weapons technology.
Did the Third Reich really prepare the Doomsday Weapon? And if so,
where is the technology today? Was it discovered by the Allies or does
it lurk secretly deep in the earth waiting for its rediscovery? If such
an Ultimate Weapon has already been in existence for more than fifty
years, then it is a legitimate question to ask what today's military
really, actually possesses." (page 96, quoted from Das
Geheimnis der deutschen Atombombe: Gewann Hitlers Wissenschaftler den
nuklearen Wettlauf doch? Die Geheimprojekte bei Innsbruck im Raum
Jonastal bei Arnstadt und in Prag, Edgar Mayer and Thomas
Mehner (2001) p. 89)
The Bell
makes comments about the "monstrous physics" discovered and developed
by the Nazis that "totally abandoned conventional physical laws" (page
220-221). These are described as "scalar waves",
"longitudinal waves", "vorticular physics", etc. However, this just
seems to be a lot of popular technobabble. The key words today should
probably be "non-local physics" , "nuclear spin", and a mathematical
creature called "curl". The Nazis apparently discovered new,
unconventional ways of applying these concepts to electric and magnetic
fields. The results and capabilities would be astonishing—even seemingly magical—to the modern physicist. Our
institutions cannot currently handle these concepts because the
required paradigm shift is enough to choke a swampful of alligators,
and our staid, complexity-loving, overfunded atherosclerotic
institutions are just not willing to go in wildly new directions. (See
also:
In Search
of the
Geometry of Space, Time and Motion
, Reactionless
Propulsion, and The
Problem of Quantum Locality )
The Truth
about the Wunderwaffe, Igor Witkowski, 2nd ed. (2013)
Saucers,
Swastikas and Psyops, Joseph P. Farrell (2011)
Secrets of
the Third Reich: The Rediscovery of Vimanas http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ryS1o0u31E
Man-Made
UFOs 1944-1994 50 years of Suppression, Renato Vesco
& C. H. Childress (1994). The title of this book says it all.
It is "a comprehensive and in-depth look at the early 'flying saucer'
technology of Nazi Germany and the genesis of early man-made UFOs . .
." (back cover). It is quite interesting from an historical perspective
and is well-researched, well-written, and has abundant illustrations.
It could use an index however. My favorite samplings:
What becomes clear to
researchers into man-made UFOs and early German discoid craft is that
this technology is real, "Above Top Secret," and is possessed by
various groups on this planet today. Not only are the Americans and
British said to have this technology but so do such countries as
Russia, China, France, Italy, Israel, and Chile. Private corporations,
individuals and agencies are also claimed to possess "craft."
(p. 369; see also quiz
above)
In June of 1936
Marconi demonstrated to Italian Fascist dictator Benito Mussolini a
wave gun device that could be used as a defensive weapon. . . . Marconi
demonstrated the ray on a busy highway north of Milan one afternoon.
Mussolini had asked his wife Rachele to also be on the highway at
precisely 3:30 in the afternoon. Marconi's device caused the electrical
system in all the cars, including Rachele's, to malfunction for half an
hour, while her chauffeur and other motorists checked their fuel pumps
and spark plugs. At 3:35 [sic?] all the cars were
able to start again. Rachele Mussolini later published the account in
her autobiography. (p. 362)
It also comments (p.
338) on Air Force Regulation 80-17 , which I quote here, in
part, from another source (http://www.cufon.org/cufon/afr80-17.htm
):
AIR
FORCE REGULATION 80-17
DEPARTMENT
OF THE AIR FORCE
Washington, D.C. 19 September 1966
Research and Development
UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS (UFO)
This
regulation establishes the Air Force program for investigating and
analyzing UFOs over the United States. It provides for
uniform investigative procedures and release of information.
The investigations and analyses prescribed are related directly to the
Air Force's responsibility for the air defense of the United
States. The UFO Program requires prompt reporting and rapid
evaluation of data for successful identification. Strict
compliance with this regulation is mandatory.
. . .
2.
Program Objectives. Air Force interest in UFOs is two-fold: to determine if
the UFO is a possible threat to the United states and to use the
scientific and technical data gained from study of UFO reports.
To attain these objectives, it is necessary to explain or identify the
stimulus which caused the observer to report his observation as an
unidentified flying object.
a. Air Defence. The majority of UFOs reported to the Air
Force have been conventional or
familiar
objects which pose no threat to our security.
(1)
It may be possible that foreign countries may develop flying vehicles
of revolutionary
configuration or propulsion.
UFOs have, with
impunity, invaded restricted airspace, prowled around nuclear missile
sites, destroyed radar installations, and are capable by far, of
out-maneuvering the most advanced military fighter aircraft any nation
has produced. Popular opinion seems to favor the idea that
this technology is extraterrestrial, being developed by "space aliens".
But if in fact if has been developed by humans,
this prospect is even more frightening!
Does only one group or country have this capability? Or is there a
"balance of power" —some
equivalent of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD)? How are they financed?
Where is the manufacturing done? How has the science been help secret
for so long? How did our proud country (or anyone's) "miss the boat"?
Should we continue to develop rockets for space exploration, or develop
other far superior technologies (which someone obviously possesses)?
All sorts of awkward, agonizing questions can be raised. Some of these
questions are addressed in this book.
Vesco's book also has
an important chapter, The Advent of "Suction Aircraft". Aerodynamic
drag could be significantly reduced by sucking in the boundary layer on
portions of a wing surface. The effect had practical limits when
applied to conventional aircraft. It would work better if the fuselage
could be eliminated. And so the next incarnation was a flying wing. An
even fuller explotation was possible with a saucer shaped aircraft.
These aircraft used conventional technology, but had spectacular
reductions in drag, and equally spectacular increases in
speeds. Later, these developments were followed by stunning
breakthroughs in the application of electric and magnetic fields to the
field of aviation. The result is (apparently) the modern-day UFO.
Also valuable are the
numerous photos and drawings of saucer craft. Included are sixteen
photos from the Brown/Bahnson experiments.
Sideways
relevant: "Super-insulated clothing could eliminate need for indoor
heating", Lisa Zyga (Jan 2015) Silver nanowires are used to reflect
infrared heat from the body. The fabric is also electrically conductive
and could be used to control exposure to electric fields. http://phys.org/news/2015-01-super-insulated-indoor.html
The Rise of the
Fourth Reich, Jim Marrs (2008). Some notable quotes:
"The Germans were
defeated in World War II . . . but not the Nazis. They were simply
forced to move." (p. 4)
"One edition of the American Heritage Dictionary of the
English Language defined fascism as "a philosophy or system
of government that advocates or exercises a dictatorship of the extreme
right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership
together with an ideology of belligerent nationalism." (p. 6)
"In twenty-first century America, many thoughtful persons have
witnessed what appears to be a recycling of the events of pre-World War
II Germany: the destruction of a prominent national structure; rushed
emergency legislation; the rise of a secretive national security
apparatus; attempts to resister both firearms and people, coupled with
preemptive wars of aggression propelled by fervent nationalism." (p. 7)
"Lenin apparently came to understand that he was being manipulated.
"The state does not function as we desired," he once wrote. "A man is
at the wheel and seems to lead it, but the car does not drive in the
desired direction. It moves as another force wishes." " (p. 10)
"President Woodrow Wilson, who was intimately connected with
conspiratorial power, once wrote, "Some of the biggest men in the
United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of
somebody, are afraid of something. They know there is a power somewhere
so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so
pervasive that they had better not speak above their breath when they
speak in condemnation of it." "(p. 257)
"Forrestal noted, "These men are not incompetent or stupid. They are
crafty and brilliant." " (p.258)
"The Bavarian Illuminati was formed on May 1, 1776, by Adam Weishaupt .
. . . Weishaupt also evoked a philosophy that has been used with
terrible results down through the years by Hitler and many other
tyrants. "Behold our secret. Remember that the end justifies the
means," he wrote, "and that the wise ought to take all the means to do
good which the wicked take to do evil." Thus, for the enlightened —or "illuminated"—any
means to gain their ends is acceptable, whether this includes deceit,
theft, murder, or war. The key to Illuminati control was
secrecy. "The great strength of our Order lies in its concealment. Let
it never appear in any place in its own name, but always covered by
another name, and another occupation", stated Weishaupt." (p. 13)
"Why of course people don't want war. . . . That is understood. But
after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy,
and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it
is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a
communist dictatorship. . . . Voice or no voice, the people can always
be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to
do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists
for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger."
(p. 345, said by Reichsmarschall Hermann Goering )
"While Nazi science was brought to America after World War II, so were
attendant Nazi restrictions on scientific liberty. . . . Such tight
inner control over scientific advances was reminiscent of the late-war
Nazi SS control over technology in the Third Reich." (p.262)
Food for thought, at
least. Be sure to read the Epilogue. The book has an index and a
chapter-by-chapter list of sources.
See also http:////www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2012/01/age-of-the-psychopaths/
'the
rich oppress' —James
2:6
UFOs for
the 21st Century Mind: A Fresh Guide to an Ancient Mystery,
Richard Dolan (2014) My review: This 486 page book is another
well-written comprehensive overview of the complex, multifaceted field
of UFOs by Dolan:
What we need is an
up-to-date assessment of where we are in this incredible field. That is
why I wrote this book. This a comprehensive overview of the UFO
phenomenon for people of the 21st century. (page 3)
When assessing the
full range of the UFO subject, one is struck by a richness, depth, and
profundity that is nothing short of astonishing. Whether we examine it
as detectives, philosophers, historians, political analysts,
psychologists, intelligence experts, aviation geeks, biologists,
astronomers, physicists, cynics, or utopians, we find that the subject
simply gets deeper and deeper the further along we go. (page 470)
I am glad Dolan makes
the last statement quoted above. Most of the UFO literature is about reports
of sightings of UFOs, and caters to the "mystery
addiction syndrome" of the public. Reading through all this stuff can
get rather boring. There is virtually nothing published about what kind
of phyiscs is used by UFOs, and nothing about how to
reproducibly build a "model T" version of a UFO. Still, the
mainstream scientific community seems to be slightly more accommodating
to "non-local physics" than it has been in the past ( http://www.universetoday.com/108044/why-einstein-will-never-be-wrong/
See comments by Brian Fraser ) Dolan reminds us that this
is still a rich and varied field that can keep all sorts of
investigators busy for a very long time.
UFOs and
the National Security State: The Cover-Up Exposed, 1973-1991,
Richard M. Dolan (2009) (My review: This 638 page book is "the nearest
thing to an official history of the UFO phenomenon that we'er ever to
see" (back cover). It is meticulously researched, documents an
abundance of UFO encounters, and presents insights into the
complexities of public perceptions, government secrets, obfuscation,
disinformation, financing of "black" projects, the role of the
military/industrial complex, and how "break-away civilizations" can
come into existence. It has an extensive bibliography and a thorough
index. Overall, it is a very well crafted, very informative work. )
. 
These rings "appeared over several
areas of
Copenhagen and Denmark". 
