gravity modification: a review of concepts developed benjamin thomas solomon iseti llc international...
TRANSCRIPT
GRAVITY MODIFICATION:A REVIEW OF CONCEPTS DEVELOPEDBenjamin Thomas SolomoniSETI LLCInternational Space Development Conference 2007, Dallas, TX, May 27
5/27/2007 ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon 1
2
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Objective
5/27/2007
1. To facilitate the development of new propulsion technologies that bypass momentum exchange.
3
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Scope
5/27/2007
Scope: 1. Modern theories are concerned with the shape of the curve & therefore, require General Relativity & more complex
theories.2. The scope is that of galactic & intergalactic space.
Gravitational Field Funnel
Gravitational Source
Scope: 1. Time Dilation Transformation determines effect given the shape of the curve.2. The region considered is so small that Special Theory is sufficient.3. Derived propulsion technology alters the shape in that ‘tiny’ region to ‘present’ motion.
Basic Transformation Thesis
Top half of particle
Time dilation transformation
The appropriate transformation is applied to alter the properties of the particle.
5/27/2007 4
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon
5
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon How Things Fit Together
Platform of Concepts
Momentum Exchange /
Momentum Exchange Bypass
Yet To Be Determined
AsymmetricalTransformations
Falling in a Gravitational Field
Asymmetric Photon Reflection in a
Gravitational Field(not completed)
Time Dilation Transformations
TranslocationTechnologies
Continuity of Frames of Reference
Laithwaite Effect
5/27/2007
Same Phenomenon
CONTINUITY OF FRAMES OFREFERENCE- Properties of Frames of Reference- Time Travel & Temporal Reversibility- 5-Particel Box Paradox
5/27/2007 ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon 6
7
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Continuity of Frames of Reference
Gravity Thought Experiment
5/27/2007
Blue Shift Transformation
Red Shift Transformation
Gravitational Field
A gravitational field is an example of how a frame of reference is transformed in a consistent manner, independent of the observer.
8
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Continuity of Frames of Reference
The Four Properties
5/27/2007
1 Net Cumulative,
2 Path Independent,
3 Reversible, and
4 Preservation.
F1 = T0,1(F0) (B.3.1.1)
Where F0 = frame of reference 0, at initial state, 0F1 = frame of reference 1, at ending state, 1 T0,1 = transformation for frame of reference
from F0 to F1.
The Continuity of Frames of Reference states that an observer’s frame of reference is continuous and consistent with the observations, events and processes of another observer; and obey four requirements,
9
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Continuity of Frames of Reference
Net Cumulative Property
5/27/2007
Net Cumulative Property:
This property requires that the total net effect of all the transformations along the path 0, 1, 2, …, n-2, n-1 & n, must be the same as the single direct path, 0 to n.
Fn = Tn-1,n(Fn-1)= Tn-1,n(Tn-2,n-1(Fn-2))= Tn-1,n(Tn-2,n-1(Tn-3,n-2(Fn-3))= Tn-1,n(Tn-2,n-1(Tn-3,n-2( ... T0,1(F0) ... )))= T0,n(F0)
T0,n(F0) =
Tn-1,n(Tn-2,n-1(Tn-3,n-2( ... T0,1(F0) ... ))) (B.3.2.1) n
0
10
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Continuity of Frames of Reference
Path Independence Property
5/27/2007
Path Independence Property:
The net transformation along the path m-x-n must be the same as the net transformation along an alternative path m-y-n, as the Net Cumulative Property requires net transformations equal that of the single most direct path, m-n
Tx,n(Tm,x(Fm)) = Ty,n(Tm,y(Fm)) (3.3.1) (B.3.3.1)
for any x ≠ y
n
m
x
y
11
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Continuity of Frames of Reference
Path Independence Property
5/27/2007
Path Independence, is the primary representation of the Principle of Relativity that the laws of physics must be the same for any inertia frame of reference. Or more clearly, there are two elements to this Path Independence.
1. Any two observers with different frames of reference will observe the laws of physics, by the appropriate frame of reference transformation. This is because it is possible to transform the first observer’s frame of reference to the second observer’s, by the appropriate transformation. For the inertia frames of reference Lorentz-Fitzgerald transformations apply.
2. Any observer, moving from a starting frame to another different ending frame will observe the laws of physics by the appropriate transformation of the frames of reference. A good example of a frame of reference being transformed by the non-linear distortions is that in a gravitational field.
12
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Continuity of Frames of Reference
Reversible Property
5/27/2007
Reversible Property:
Transformations are reversible if retracing our steps will return us to our original set of conditions.
This is a necessary consequence of the Path Independence Property.
The Reversible Property is critical to any space exploration endeavor, as one expects to return home, at some reasonable time in the future.
Fn = Tm,n(Tn,m(Fn)) (B.3.4.1) n
m
x
13
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Continuity of Frames of Reference
5/27/2007
Spatial Reversibility:
Fn(s1) =
Tm(s0),n(s1) (Tn(s1),m(s0) (Fn(s1))) (3.4.4)
Temporal Reversibility:
Fn(t1) =
Tm(t0),n(t1) (Tn(t1),m(t0) (Fn(t1))) (3.4.5)
x-axis
t-axis
Temporal Reversibility
Spatial Reversibility
y-axis
Spatial Reversibility
14
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Continuity of Frames of Reference
Collective or Individual
5/27/2007
Is reversibility collective or individual?
If temporal reversibility is collective, it means that the entire universe travel backwards and forwards in time together.
With individual temporal reversibility a single entity can reverse temporal frame of reference transformations independently of the surrounding universe.
Therefore, one cannot detect Collective Temporal Reversibility, but on can detect Individual Temporal Reversibility.
15
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Continuity of Frames of Reference
Time Travel versus Temporal Reversibility
5/27/2007
The distinction between time travel and temporal reversibility:
Traveling backwards in time,Fn(sy,t+j) = Tm(sx,t),n(sy,t+j) (Fm(sx,t)) | U(so,t),(ss,t-j)W(so,t) (B.3.4.8)
Traveling forwards in time,Fn(sy,t+j) = Tm(sx,t),n(sy,t+j) (Fm(sx,t)) | U(so,t),(ss,t+i)W(so,t) (B.3.4.9)
Taking world state into account as, Temporal Reversibility given that the Universe keeps moving forward in time, can be rewritten as, Fn(t1) = Tm(t0),n(t1) (Tn(t1),m(t0) (Fn(t1))) | U(sq,t),(sp,t+i) W(sq,t)
16
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Continuity of Frames of Reference
Individual Temporal Reversibility
5/27/2007
Expansion of the Universe
Expansion of the UniverseExpansion of the Universe
Expansion of the Universe
We were here yesterday.
We are here today.
We will be here tomorrow.
Arrow of Time
Temporal Reversibility of Entity
Individual Temporal Reversibility
17
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Continuity of Frames of Reference
Preservation Property
5/27/2007
Preservation Property:
The Preservation Property requires that if an event occurred at some location and time, governed by some transformation, then, that event is preserved and real, such that
1. It may or may not be observed by different observes, and
2. If observed, in general, relative simultaneity is in effect.
Fi = T0,i (F0) for all i (B.3.5.1)
Or,
T0,i (F0) = Fi for all i within the light cone
N0,i (F0) = 0 for all i outside the light cone
Where F0 = Frame 0, initial state, 0, frame of referenceFi = Frame i, ending state, i, frame of referenceN0,i = the null transformation for frame of reference from F0.
18
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Continuity of Frames of Reference
Inconsistent Transformations
5/27/2007
Inconsistent Transformations:
A frame of reference transformation is inconsistent when at least one of the three properties (Net Cumulative, Path Independence & Reversible) no longer holds.
An inconsistent Path Independence requires, that if,
Fn(x) = Tx,n(Tm,x(Fm))Fn(y) = Ty,n(Tm,y(Fm))
Then,
Fn(x) ≠ Fn(y) (B.4.2)n
m
x
y
Fn(x) ≠ Fn(y)
n
19
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Continuity of Frames of Reference
The Duration Problem
5/27/2007
Requirements for “conventional” Interstellar Travel: The Duration Problem
Journey duration, D, Dm,x,n > Dm,y,n
Journey distance, Sm,x,n , may or may not be the same as, Sm,y,n , or,
Sm,x,n ≤/≥ Sm,y,n
Where x ≠ yDm,y,n = travel duration between n and m via xDm,x,n = travel duration between n and m via ySm,y,n = travel distance between n and m via xSm,x,n = travel distance between n and m via y≤/≥ = any of, less than, equal to or greater
than relationship
20
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Continuity of Frames of Reference
Reversibility Property for Inconsistent Paths
5/27/2007
The Reversible property holds for Inconsistent paths:
The m-x-n path, the conventional path is reversible.
Fn(x) = Tx,n(Tm,x(Tx,m(Tn,x(Fn)))) (B.4.5)
However, the m-y-n path, the path that is inconsistent with respect to m-x-n, the reversibility condition is,
Fn(y) = Ty,n(Tm,y(Ty,m(Tn,y(Fn)))) (B.4.6)
Where Fn(x) ≠ Fn(y)
n
m
x
y
Fn(x) ≠ Fn(y)
n
21
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Continuity of Frames of Reference
The 5-Particle Box Paradox
5/27/2007
Particle A Particle BRelative Velocity, VAB = 0
Distance, SAB = s
Particle C Particle DRelative Velocity, VCD = 0
Distance, SCD = s
Distance, SAC = s
Distance, SBD = s
Relative Velocity, VAC = 0
Relative Velocity, VBD = 0
Particle E
Relative Velocity, VDE = v
Relative Velocity, VCE = v
Distance, SAE = s√(2-v2/c2)
Distance,SAD = s√(2) Observe that two distance
transformations are present within this 5-Particle Box:
TAD = √(2)
TAE = √(2-v2/c2)
even though particles D & E are at the same place, just before impact.
Velocity is a space transformation operator.
22
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Continuity of Frames of Reference
Translocation Transformations
5/27/2007
Translocation Transformations:
Under the right transformations it is possible to measure any distance equal to zero
Ti,Z(si) = 0 (B.6.1)
In Special Relativity, the Lorentz-Fitzgerald transformation, requires that velocity approach the speed of light, as
v → c AND √(1-v2/c2) → 0
If one adds, another key property, that time dilation, is not altered, such that,
Ti,Z (ti) = ti (B.6.2)
where ti = is the time dilation property of frame of reference, i.
23
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Continuity of Frames of Reference
Translocation Transformations
5/27/2007
Translocation Transformations:
The two tizzy transformations require a technology that is capable of providing asymmetrical transformations, with respect to space and time. The frame of reference transformations are such that it applies to space but not to time.
Then, the tizzy transformations provide a path, m-n, from m to n, as follows,
Fn (ti,xn,yn,zn) = Ti,z Fm(t0,xm,ym,zm) (B.6.4)
Such that,
T i,z (√[(xn- xm)2 + (yn- ym)2 + (zn- zm)2 ]) ≈ 0 (B.6.5)
24
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Continuity of Frames of Reference
Translocation Transformations
5/27/2007
What will it look like?
The tizzy transformations, show that translocation technology should produce asymmetrical transformations, with respect to space (1) and time (2).
Ti,Z(si) = 0 (B.7.1)
Ti,Z (ti) = ti (B.7.2)
Unlike “conventional” interstellar travel, time is zero and distance not important, the two tizzy transformations, require different, if not opposite, requirements, space is zero, time is about the same.
It is reported that Dr. Vadim Chernobrov (J Randles, 2005), had demonstrated the opposite asymmetrical transformations, time but not distance. Note that there seems to be some debate about the validity of Dr. Chernobrov’s work.
25
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Continuity of Frames of Reference
Translocation Transformations
5/27/2007
What will it look like?
One can infer the following key technology characteristics,
1. Ability to generate asymmetric transformations with respect to space & time.
2. Utilize field effects, to achieve the translocation.
3. Manipulates distance and not time.
4. Does not use velocity (velocity doesn’t allow asymmetric transformations)
5. Does not use mass (mass doesn’t allow asymmetric transformations).
SOME OBSERVATIONS OF A FALLING BODY- Time Dilation Velocity = Escape Velocity
5/27/2007 ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon 26
27
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Some Observations About A Falling Body
Time Dilation & Gravity
5/27/2007
Object Mass Radius Gravity Gravitational Time dilation Equivalent Escape - Equivalent
at surface Escape Velocity Lorentz/Time Velocity Error
Dilation Velocity
M R g ve tv vf ve - vf
kg m m/s2 m/s s m/s
Sun 2.00E+30 6.90E+08 274.98 621,946 1.00000215195969 621,946 0.0000000%
Mercury 3.59E+23 2.44E+06 3.70 4,431 1.00000000010922 4,431 0.0000153%
Venus 4.90E+24 6.07E+06 8.87 10,383 1.00000000059976 10,383 0.0000018%
Earth 5.98E+24 6.38E+06 9.80 11,187 1.00000000069626 11,187 -0.0000080%
Mars 6.58E+23 3.39E+06 3.71 5,087 1.00000000014395 5,087 0.0000245%
Jupiter 1.90E+27 7.14E+07 23.12 59,618 1.00000001977343 59,618 0.0000002%
Saturn 5.68E+26 5.99E+07 8.96 35,566 1.00000000703708 35,566 -0.0000002%
Uranus 8.67E+25 2.57E+07 7.77 21,201 1.00000000250060 21,201 -0.0000005%
Neptune 1.03E+26 2.47E+07 11.00 23,552 1.00000000308580 23,552 -0.0000019%
Pluto 1.20E+22 1.15E+06 0.72 1,178 1.00000000000772 1,178 0.0001586%
28
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Some Observations About A Falling Body
Time Dilation & Gravity
5/27/2007
Observe that two velocity transformations are present within the gravitational field, at a distance ‘r’ from the center of the gravitational source, for a free falling body:
T∞,r = √ (1 – v2 / c2)
Tr,r = 1/√(1-2GM/(Rc2))
Both transformations provide the same escape velocity or falling from infinity velocity at a distance ‘r’.
Gravity is a velocity transformation operator, among others.
Tr,r = 1/√(1-2GM/(rc2))T∞,r = √ (1 – v2 / c2)
TIME DILATION TRANSFORMATION MODEL- The Transformation Model- The Numerical Model- Numerical Model Results
5/27/2007 ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon 29
30
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Time Dilation Transformation ModelTop Half of Particle, Illustrating Time Dilation Distortion
Gravitational Source
Shape distortion: Thickness of each slice of particle is transformed by Lorentz-Fitzgerald transformation.
Mass distortion: Mass of each slice of particle is transformed by Lorentz-Fitzgerald transformation.
Transformation: At constant velocity time dilation is constant. There is no time dilation transformation.
Transformation: In a gravity well, time dilation transformation is non-linearThickness of each
slice of particle.
Thickness of each slice of particle.
5/27/2007
31
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Time Dilation Transformation ModelTop Half of Particle, Illustrating The Numerical Model
Center of Mass of Particle, is off center
Mass increases non-linearly as dictated by Lorentz-Fitzgerald transformation
(from light yellow to blue to purple)
Shape distortion, Left Hand Side is longer than Right Hand Side
Gravitational Source
5/27/2007
32
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Time Dilation Transformation Model
Excel’s limitation with when particle size is 0.001 m
5/27/2007
Particle Diameter (m) 0.01 m
Estimate Frequency 29,979,246 kHz
Gravitational Center of Mass Time Dilation Change in
Acceleration Shift Time Dilation
g (m/s)
Pluto 0.72 -1.0842022E-18 1.0000000000077500000000000000 0.0000000000000000000000000000
Mercury 3.70 0.0000000E+00 1.0000000001092300000000000000 0.0000000000000000000000000000
Mars 3.71 1.1926224E-18 1.0000000001441100000000000000 0.0000000000000000000000000000
Uranus 7.77 -1.1926224E-18 1.0000000025046000000000000000 0.0000000000000000000000000000
Venus 8.87 -2.3852448E-18 1.0000000005993200000000000000 0.0000000000000000000000000000
Saturn 8.96 0.0000000E+00 1.0000000070400300000000000000 0.0000000000000000000000000000
Earth 9.80 9.7578195E-19 1.0000000006958800000000000000 0.0000000000000000000000000000
Neptune 11.00 -1.8431437E-18 1.0000000030959500000000000000 0.0000000000000000000000000000
Jupiter 23.12 0.0000000E+00 1.0000000197564300000000000000 0.0000000000000000000000000000
Sun 274.98 1.0841998E-18 1.0000021519656800000000000000 0.0000000000000000000000000000
1000suns 280302.04 1.5795251E-17 1.0021589301332100000000000000 0.0000000000000313082892944294
33
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Time Dilation Transformation Model
Center of Mass shift in the presence of a change in time dilation.
5/27/2007
Particle Diameter (m) 1000 M
Estimate Frequency 300 kHz
Gravitational Center of Mass Time Dilation Change in
Acceleration Shift Time Dilation
g (m/s)
Pluto 0.72 4.9737992E-13 1.0000000000077500000000000000 0.0000000000000068833827526760
Mercury 3.70 2.1174174E-12 1.0000000001092300000000000000 0.0000000000000448530101948563
Mars 3.71 4.1211479E-12 1.0000000001441100000000000000 0.0000000000000424105195406810
Uranus 7.77 7.3470119E-12 1.0000000025046000000000000000 0.0000000000000974775815620887
Venus 8.87 6.9206862E-12 1.0000000005993200000000000000 0.0000000000000985878045867139
Saturn 8.96 1.0203394E-11 1.0000000070400300000000000000 0.0000000000001174615960053420
Earth 9.80 8.3417717E-12 1.0000000006958800000000000000 0.0000000000001090239010181900
Neptune 11.00 7.6454398E-12 1.0000000030959500000000000000 0.0000000000001252331571777180
Jupiter 23.12 2.1699975E-11 1.0000000197564300000000000000 0.0000000000002764455331316640
Sun 274.98 2.3322805E-10 1.0000021519656800000000000000 0.0000000000031157298963080400
1000suns 280302.04 2.3534662E-07 1.0021589301332100000000000000 0.0000000031426559132796700000
34
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Time Dilation Transformation Model
Center of Mass shift as distance increases
5/27/2007
Particle Diameter (m) 1 M
Estimated Frequency 299,792 kHz
Distance
from Center of Gravitational Center of Mass Time Dilation Change in
Gravitational Acceleration Shift Time Dilation
Source (m) g (m/s) 1 1
10000Suns 690,000,000 280302.04 7.79221E-14 1.002158930133210000000000000000 0.000000000220105694073939000000
R0 790,000,000 213830.80 5.96453E-14 1.001884874662810000000000000000 0.000000000213872991279916000000
R1 890,000,000 168478.47 4.6981E-14 1.001672559346670000000000000000 0.000000000207867506428468000000
R2 990,000,000 136161.41 3.78156E-14 1.001503232810110000000000000000 0.000000000202136259337560000000
R3 1,090,000,000 112323.71 3.15012E-14 1.001365039026740000000000000000 0.000000000196650931318484000000
R4 1,190,000,000 94238.97 2.71804E-14 1.001250114671670000000000000000 0.000000000191362811035924000000
R5 1,290,000,000 80194.58 2.31354E-14 1.001153038882220000000000000000 0.000000000186305616659757000000
R6 1,390,000,000 69070.86 1.92279E-14 1.001069953262480000000000000000 0.000000000181431515465297000000
R7 1,490,000,000 60110.72 1.71774E-14 1.000998036779690000000000000000 0.000000000176736104761777000000
R8 1,590,000,000 52787.39 1.55563E-14 1.000935179091290000000000000000 0.000000000172254871768477000000
R9 1,690,000,000 46725.18 1.09538E-14 1.000879770003810000000000000000 0.000000000167916038324542000000
35
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Time Dilation Transformation Model
Planetary Center of Mass displacement and Gravitational Acceleration
5/27/2007
36
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Time Dilation Transformation Model
1000 Suns Center of Mass displacement and Gravitational Acceleration
5/27/2007
37
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Time Dilation Transformation Model
1000 Suns Change in Time Dilation and Gravitational Acceleration
5/27/2007
38
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Time Dilation Transformation Model
1000 Suns Change in Time Dilation and Center of Mass Shift
5/27/2007
39
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Time Dilation Transformation Model
Particle Compression Under Gravity
5/27/2007
40
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Particle Compression In a Gravitational Field
Numerical Model Simulation
5/27/2007
Run Numerical Model Simulation for Particle Compression Under Gravity
41
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Time Dilation Transformation Model
Relationship between Radius of Particle & Center of Mass Shift
5/27/2007
42
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Time Dilation Transformation Model
Conjectures
5/27/2007
Conjecture 3: It is not possible to precisely measure the gravitational constant, G, because variations in particle size will alter the actual value of this ‘constant’.
Test: Measure G, with one material, and measure it again with a different material, which has different particle size.
Conjecture 4: Since particle size is important, will the effect of gravitational lensing vary with particle wavelength?
Test: Compare gravitational lensing at optical frequency with that at radio frequency, if that is possible. Check if the effect is the same.
MOMENTUM EXCHANGE & BYPASS
- The Momentum Exchange Process- Momentum Exchange Bypass
5/27/2007 ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon 43
44
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Momentum Exchange
A Dissection of a Collision
Particle’s own frame of reference Time dilation field
Particle moving from left to rightprior to collision
Particle moving from right to leftprior to collision
Time dilation, t= TTime dilation, t= T
Particle’s own frame of reference
Particle moving from left to rightprior to collision
Particle moving from right to leftprior to collision
Particle at collision
Time dilation, t > T
Time dilation, t > T
5/27/2007
45
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Momentum Exchange
A Dissection of a Collision
Particle’s own frame of reference Time dilation field
During collision the particles compress
Time dilation, t >T
After collision the particles separate
Particle’s own frame of reference Time dilation field
Time dilation, t > T
After collision the particles separate
5/27/2007
46
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Momentum Exchange
Momentum Exchange as a Time Dilation Transformation Model
1 2
3 4
Before Collision
During Collision
5/27/2007
47
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Momentum Exchange
Numerical Model Simulation
5/27/2007
Run Numerical Model Simulation for Momentum Exchange
48
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Momentum Exchange Bypass
Momentum Exchange Bypass as a Time Dilation Transformation Model
No applied transformation.Particle continues in Inertial
Applied transformation is equivalent to a downward Force. Particle makes a 90 degree downward turn.
Second applied transformation is equivalent to a horizontal force. Particle makes a 90 degree horizontal turn.
No applied transformation.Particle continues downward
No applied transformation.Particle continues in Inertial
5/27/2007
THE LAITHWAITE EFFECT
- Experimental Results - Conceptual Properties
5/27/2007 ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon 49
50
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon The Laithwaite Effect
Prof. Eric Laithwaite
5/27/2007
-Prof. Eric Laithwaite (1921 - 1997)
-The inventor of the linear motor
-The inventor of the maglev technology used in Japanese and German high speed trains.
-Emeritus Professor of Heavy Electrical Engineering at Imperial College, London, UK
-Presented some anomalous gyroscopic behavior for the Faraday lectures at the Royal Institution, in 1973.
-Included in this lecture-demonstration was a big motorcycle wheel weighing 50lb.
-He spun and raised effortlessly above his head with one hand, claiming it had lost weight and so contravened Newton's third law.
51
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon The Laithwaite Effect
Laithwaite Video
5/27/2007
52
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon The Laithwaite Effect
A Video of Solomon’s Experiment
5/27/2007
53
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon The Laithwaite Effect
Gyroscopic versus Laithwaite’s Results
5/27/2007
1 10 19 28 37 46 55 64 73 82 91 100
109
118
127
136
145
154
163
172
181
190
199
208
217
226
235
244
S1
-
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
0.0
Ratio of Spin Disc Radius to Rotating
Lever Arm
Rotating Precession Frequency (Hz)
0.0
1.6
0.8
0.4
1.2
5500
500RPM
2.78 Hz ≤ ωprecession ≤ 9.68 Hz
Theoretical Sensitivity Ranges:
1. 1.5m ≤ Lever Arm Length ≤ 2.5m
2. 0.26m ≤ Gyro Radius ≤ 0.34m
3. 4,500 rpm ≤ Gyro Spin ≤ 5,500 rpm
167 rpm ≤ ωprecession ≤ 580 rpm
Big Wheel ωprecession ≈ 7 rpm
54
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon The Laithwaite Effect
Summary Experimental Results
5/27/2007
Static Weights
Wheel Upper & Lower Stands 111 lb
Wheel + Upper Stand 75 lb
Lower Stand 36 lb
Wheel 55 lb
Dynamic Weight Lowest Highest Average
Not Spinning 109 lb 111 lb 110 lb
First Experiment (Spinning) 65 lb 120.5 lb 92.75 lb
Second Experiment (Spinning) 56 lb 135 lb 95.5 lb
55
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon The Laithwaite Effect
Summary Experimental Results
5/27/2007
Rotation
Weight
>7 revs
Weight Loss Behavior
Increasing Field Strength110 lb
135 lbCollapsing Field ? Falling
56 lb
Weight G
ain Behavior
Spin > 1000 rpm
< 7 revs
10 revs
<7 revs
Rotation
Weight
>7 revs
Weight Loss Behavior
Increasing Field Strength110 lb
135 lbCollapsing Field ? Falling
56 lb
Weight G
ain Behavior
Spin > 1000 rpm
< 7 revs
10 revs
<7 revs
56
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon The Laithwaite Effect
Orthogonal Relationships
5/27/2007
Further, we will use the nomenclature ‘tangential’, and ‘radial’ to represent the orthogonal relationships of orbital and freefall motion respectively.
We will compare gravitational with centripetal, tangential, and radial motions respectively.
Tangential
Radial
The key to the theoretical analysis is to compare the gravitational field and the centripetal force field in their entirety, and not as a point observer in the field.
57
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon The Laithwaite Effect
Centripetal versus Gravitational Force
5/27/2007
Centripetal Force Field Gravitational Field
1. Curvature is POSITIVE
2. Change in Curvature ≠ constant
3. Gradient is POSITIVE
4. Change in Gradient = constant
If correct, gravitational effects are due to gradient, and not curvature.
1. Curvature is POSITIVE
2. Change in Curvature ≠ constant
3. Gradient is NEGATIVE
4. Change in Gradient ≠ constant
Tangential Rotational Gradient & Curvature
4.45E-11
4.45E-11
4.45E-11
4.45E-11
4.45E-11
4.45E-11
4.45E-11
4.45E-11
4.45E-11
4.45E-11
4.45E-11
4.45E-11
- 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20
Radius (m)
Cu
rva
ture
0.00E+00
5.00E-12
1.00E-11
1.50E-11
2.00E-11
2.50E-11
3.00E-11
3.50E-11
4.00E-11
4.50E-11
5.00E-11
Gra
die
nt
Tangential CurvatureTangential Gradient Tangential Gravitational Properties
0.00E+00
2.00E-24
4.00E-24
6.00E-24
8.00E-24
1.00E-23
1.20E-23
1.40E-23
1.60E-23
1.80E-23
6.E+06 7.E+06 8.E+06 9.E+06 1.E+07 1.E+07 1.E+07 1.E+07 1.E+07
Radius (m)
Cu
rva
ture
-6.00E-17
-5.00E-17
-4.00E-17
-3.00E-17
-2.00E-17
-1.00E-17
0.00E+00
Gra
die
nt
Tangential CurvatureTangential Gradient
58
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon The Laithwaite Effect
Centripetal versus Gravitational Force
5/27/2007
Gravitational Time Dilation
-1.50E+07
-1.00E+07
-5.00E+06
0.00E+00
5.00E+06
1.00E+07
1.50E+07
0 1E-10 2E-10 3E-10 4E-10 5E-10 6E-10 7E-10 8E-10
Time Dilation - 1 (s)
Rad
ius
of th
e E
arth
(m)
Radial Time DilationTangential Time Dialtion Radial Time Dilation in the Presence of Rotation
(0.40)
(0.30)
(0.20)
(0.10)
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.00E+00 5.00E-14 1.00E-13 1.50E-13 2.00E-13 2.50E-13 3.00E-13
(Time Dilation - 1)*10000 (s)
Whe
el R
adiu
s (m
)
1. Gravity’s time dilation field is funnel shaped.
1. Centripetal force’s time dilation field is conic.
2. There isn’t any radial time dilation.
59
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon The Laithwaite Effect
Precession Analysis
5/27/2007
1. Precession causes the net forces acting on the wheel to be bidirectional with respect to the pivot. They change direction from towards the pivot to away from the pivot.
Precessing net forces acting on the wheel change sign/direction.
Pivot Point
Precession
TOP VIEW
Net Force
Net Force
Spin
Torque = Gravity
Precession
≈ Precession occurs when net forces change direction across plane of rotation
SIDE VIEW
Net Force
Net Force
Pivot Point
60
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon The Laithwaite Effect
Rotation Analysis
5/27/2007
1. Rotation causes the net forces acting on the disc to be centripetal towards the pivot.
Rotating net forces acting on the wheel are centripetal.
Pivot Point
Rotation
TOP VIEW
Net Force
Net Force
Spin
Torque = Gravity
Rotation
≈ Rotation occurs when net forces are centripetal across plane of rotation
SIDE VIEW
Net Force
Net Force
Pivot Point
61
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon The Laithwaite Effect
Hypothesis of How The Laithwaite Effect is Produced
5/27/2007
For a Gyroscopic Centripetal Field the relationship between tangential and radial time dilation has not yet been determined.
Tangential Time Dilation
No RotationWith Rotation
Tangential Time Dilation
Radial Time Dilation
When Rotation exceeds a threshold value, the “flat”, tangential only, time dilation field pops and centripetal forces facilitate a radial time dilation field. The figures depict field strength values, not physical shape.
62
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon The Laithwaite Effect
Concluding Comments
5/27/2007
1. Able to reproduce Laithwaite’s results.
2. Gyroscopic precession not the cause of weight loss.
3. There are boundary conditions / threshold values, before weight loss is observed.
CONCLUSION
5/27/2007 ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon 63
64
ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Conclusion
Technology Derivatives
Lifting Technologies
Yet To Be Determined
AsymmetricalTransformations
Short Range Transportation Technologies
Force Field Technologies
Time Dilation Transformations
InterstellarTravel
Continuity of Frames of Reference
Chronogenic Storage /
Refrigeration
5/27/2007
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSNational Space Society – forum/platformRocky Mountain Mars Society Chapter – forum/platform and invaluable critique.Mike Darschewski, formerly of GMACCH Capital Corp – mathematics.Bob Schlitter, Timberline Iron Works, fabrication.Ray & Seth, A&E Cycle; Cliff, Legend Motorcycles; Mark, B&B Sportcycles; Risk, Steele’s Motorcycle; Doug, Doug’s Balancing – power transmission.Pat & Chad, Colorado Scale Center - weight scales.Mark, Joy Controls – measurement instruments.David Solomon – videographerNASA – Apollo pictureDan Duriscoe, U.S. National Park Service, A Dark Sky Over Death Valley (http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap070508.html)
5/27/2007 ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon 65
CONTACT INFORMATIONBen SolomoniSETI LLCP.O. Box 831Evergreen, CO 80439Email: [email protected]: http://www.iseti.us/
5/27/2007 ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon 66