PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-05-17, 04:22:19
News: If you have a suggestion or need for a new board title, please PM the Admins.
Please remember to keep topics and posts of the FE or casual nature. :)

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6
Author Topic: Dr. Jones - Current Research and Historical Notes  (Read 98276 times)

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1870
 
   Below is a conceptual diagram for an E-field comparative experiment using 2 charged plates, in lieu of the 2-coil B-field experiment delineated above.  Again, the 2 plates are mounted on a platform which is free to move.  Not sure yet which is more feasible, in the lab.

 The goal is the same:  to observe apparent non-conservation of momentum.

You can get better results with high K dielectric between the plates which slows down the E field propagation.  And it should work even with sine wave drive, you just have to get 90 degree phase shift between the drive onto one plate and the drive onto the other plate.  I once proposed a long stack of plates where each successive plate got a voltage 90 degrees shifted from the previous one.  Never did get the experiment done though, the company I worked for wasn't interested.

Smudge
   
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2995
You can get better results with high K dielectric between the plates which slows down the E field propagation. ...

   Wait, my friend, I don't think that will work -- the dielectric is now a physical object like the LH plate, and electric field is "launched" from the dielectric now a short distance from the RH plate.  Thus, the fields between these two (dielectric and RH plate) now push equally on the RH plate and BACK on the dielectric, and both are fixed to the platform, so there is cancellation and no impulsive force to the right.
t= L/c is made very short; too short I should think.

   Can you see this?  The same problem would arise in my 2-coil experiment above if a ferrite (or iron etc) core were placed between the coils - the forces finally would be between the end of the ferrite and the RH coil.  The left and right forces would simply cancel in that case, and there would be no acceleration, since there would be no net force.
 
   I'm looking fora situation where there is nothing physical present (air will not hurt) for a distance L (say 10 or 30 cm) between either the coils or the plates.  Thus, as I noted before,

Quote
Given the finite time for the B field from COIL1 to propagate, it reaches COIL2 at time
t (at 2) = L/c,  where c is the speed of light.

Now as the "magnetic pulse" reaches COIL2 it is energized with north pole to the left, so that its north pole REPELS the incoming north pole "wave" and COIL2 is nudged to the right, and I find that the whole system will then be pushed to the right.  This impulse to the right results in a velocity Vs to the right of the whole system, which as I said is free to move.  

(As coil2 is switched on, coil1 is turned off, so it will not be pushed by the field arriving later from coil2.)

What is the north pole of coil2 pushing against?  I see it as pushing against whatever is carrying the magnetic-field pulse which was generated near COIL1, namely the vacuum.  Thus, the experiment probes the interaction of two magnetic fields, one generated earlier by COIL1 and traveling to the right, and one generated by COIL2 as this B-field arrives, such that COIL2 is pushed to the right.
Quote


For the two-plate experiment, replace "coil" with "plate" and "magnetic" with "electric", and "north pole" with "E from negative electrons."

  It is important in the experiment that nothing carry either the B or E fields except the VACUUM itself (read, "ether" if you prefer).  I hope that's clear...
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1870
  Wait, my friend, I don't think that will work -- the dielectric is now a physical object like the LH plate, and electric field is "launched" from the dielectric now a short distance from the RH plate.  Thus, the fields between these two (dielectric and RH plate) now push equally on the RH plate and BACK on the dielectric, and both are fixed to the platform, so there is cancellation and no impulsive force to the right.

I don't see it that way.  I see a plate immersed in a dielectric (no air gap) receiving electrons from a source while at the same time there is a longitudinal electric wave arriving from the other electrode.  The net force on all the plate electrons will depend on their number density (a function of time) and the direction and amplitude of arriving field (also a function of time).  If the phasing between number density and field is correct you can get a net force in one direction (a sin^2 function).

Quote
  Can you see this?  The same problem would arise in my 2-coil experiment above if a ferrite (or iron etc) core were placed between the coils - the forces finally would be between the end of the ferrite and the RH coil.  The left and right forces would simply cancel in that case, and there would be no acceleration, since there would be no net force.

I think you are fixated on the ends  ;) .  The force is not from the end of the ferrite, that is just a simplistic approach where you imagine magnetic poles at the ends.  The force (on the ferrite) is unequally distributed on all its magnetic dipoles, and they all contribute to the force on the coil.  Take away the ends and have coils immersed within a ferromagnetic continuum then what do you get?  You certainly get an imbalance of forces on the coils, so the question is do you also get a reverse imbalance on forces on the continuum?  I think there is the possibility that such a system (which in your case of two coils could be a long ferrite rod with coils on it) could carry any imbalance or reaction out into the real vaccum by emitting more virtual particles from one end than from the other.
 
Quote
  I'm looking fora situation where there is nothing physical present (air will not hurt) for a distance L (say 10 or 30 cm) between either the coils or the plates.

Then you are using just c as the velocity and will have to live with the small time periods involved.  I think there is more to be gained if you can get lower velocities.

Smudge
   
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2995
  So we see things differently, and that's OK - I just hope that we agree that EXPERIMENTS (not arguments) will provide the answer!  The experiments I proposed above are experiments I'd like to do.

  I did look for similar tests/experiments, and found these of interest:

http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/156811/paradox-electric-current-in-a-coil-on-a-disc-will-this-disc-spin-if-the-circu?rq=1 

Somewhat like the expt I proposed, except that both B and E are involved in the SAME "thought" experiment... note the discussion of "angular momentum" contained in the field...
Interesting that NO actual experiments have been done, AFAIK!!
No refs to experiments.

One pursued by Feynman (again, without experiment) is discussed here:
http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/31425/what-is-the-answer-to-feynmans-disc-paradox
both B and E are involved in the SAME "thought" experiment... note the discussion of "angular momentum" contained in the field AGAIN.

Its high time to do actual experiments!  and that's what we try to do in this community, despite lack of funds in most cases...

   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 331
Hi Physics Prof,

Yes, electrodynamics is one of those areas where not enough experiments are done relative to the level of theory that is generated, and where there are many conflicting theories, all with weak evidence. More experiments have been done on the angular momentum of space issue than you might think, when you add in all the papers from the Hindawi National Union Journal, and the like. I'll do a bit of a lit review.

I don't have any final answers on what's true either-- the evidence is just not strong for any particular theory. My self-explanation, which doesn't rise to the level of a theory-- and is more an expression of the power of coffee :-)-- is that understanding this A.M of space issue is crucial to creating any sort of energy system that can tap it. My reading of plasma and solar physics is that E parallel B fields--they are not waves, as such-- are extremely important in this. I don't always understand the physics involved, but the E parallel B pattern is a *least energy* state of electromagnetic fields. As a result the universe must be filled with electromagnetic matter that has 'fallen' from more energetic states into this bottom state. Most of these vortical forms are closed, like toroids or knots, and become non-observable for the most part. So for myself, I accept the quite conventional view that space contains a basic energy in the form of angular momentum. Maxwell, and entropy, suggest that there is a lot of energy around in this ground EM state. This is quite similar to the highly developed vortical aether theories of the late 19th century, but does not require any pre-existing aether structure, and also might explain 'missing mass'.
Structures using parallel E and B fields can be stable and not substantially radiating (think ball lightning) and do contain energy even though they do not have a Poynting vector (carry power). As non-radiating field configurations, these structures, often very small, and possibly Planck scale, fill the universe, and lead to stories of prana, chi, and orgone. It's no accident that Feynman's paradox involves this alignment, because he is basically showing mechanical rotation can exist where there is no power, and we know that from our every day experience.

It's easy to set up experimental situation where E parallel B applies. For instance, a bar magnet with electrodes on the ends to create a similar electric field-- an Anapole.  According to some papers, this configuration may have unusual force interactions with a nearby toroid or dipole. But testing Feynman's paradox or something similar is also a very good place to start. Like I said, I will really look at what has been observed already there, and see if there is not some consensus hidden in obscure journals.

orthofield





   
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2995
Hi Physics Prof,

Yes, electrodynamics is one of those areas where not enough experiments are done relative to the level of theory that is generated, and where there are many conflicting theories, all with weak evidence. More experiments have been done on the angular momentum of space issue than you might think, when you add in all the papers from the Hindawi National Union Journal, and the like. I'll do a bit of a lit review.

I don't have any final answers on what's true either-- the evidence is just not strong for any particular theory. My self-explanation, which doesn't rise to the level of a theory-- and is more an expression of the power of coffee :-)-- is that understanding this A.M of space issue is crucial to creating any sort of energy system that can tap it. My reading of plasma and solar physics is that E parallel B fields--they are not waves, as such-- are extremely important in this. [snip for brevity]

It's easy to set up experimental situation where E parallel B applies. For instance, a bar magnet with electrodes on the ends to create a similar electric field-- an Anapole.  According to some papers, this configuration may have unusual force interactions with a nearby toroid or dipole. But testing Feynman's paradox or something similar is also a very good place to start. Like I said, I will really look at what has been observed already there, and see if there is not some consensus hidden in obscure journals.

orthofield

I look forward to any further info.
 " According to some papers, this configuration may have unusual force interactions with a nearby toroid or dipole."
  Please provide links if you have time.  Very interesting.


On another note, as I posted in the LENR/geo-fusion thread, that speakers for the upcoming ICCF-19 conference in Padua, Italy, have been selected and titles given.  I went to the last ICCF meeting at the University of Missouri, but this one in Italy is just too expensive.  But we can follow and comment via youtube videos, etc.
  Here's the link:
http://www.iccf19.com/program_abstract.html

   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 331
Hi Physics Prof,

The attached paper by Afanasiev is quite interesting throughout, but the section I was referring to is on pg. 15. After a discussion of possible nonreciprocity between antennas of different toroidal orders, he describes an experiment which illustrates force differentials between moving a circumferentially magnetized toroid near a current loop, and moving a current loop near such a toroid. In another paper he mentions this experiment as a test, rather than a hypothetical, but doesn't give a paper reference. As he points out on the next page, conservation of momentum is not violated when taking into account the small radiation in this experiment. Afanasiev's principles are being used to design nonreciprocal metamaterials, and the concept of Toroidal moments developed by him and several other Russian researchers have been quite productive in nuclear physics and in chemistry.

Perhaps more important from a practical standpoint are his assertions on pg. 18 that interacting coils where the interwinding capacitances are different may be nonreciprocal at high frequencies. He mentions experiments which show nonreciprocity between toroids and supertoroids. Then in the next couple of pages he shows that a current loop and an electric dipole are non reciprocal. A lot of experiments seem to use a single wire running inside a solenoid, and Afanasiev seems to be corroborating the idea that induction will only go 'one way' in that situation.
There are lots of interesting bits in other parts of this paper and it is well worth reading. I can't claim to follow all the math but it makes sense to the level I can get it.

orthofield
   
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2995
  Very interesting and informative paper - thank you, OF.

Quote
Electromagnetic fields of the simplest time-dependent sources (current loop, electric dipole, toroidal solenoid, etc), their interactions with an external electromagnetic field and between themselves are found. They are applied to the analysis of the Lorentz and Feld–Tai lemmas (or reciprocity-like theorems) having numerous applications in electrodynamics, optics, radiophysics, electronics, etc. It is demonstrated that these lemmas are valid for more general time dependences of the electromagnetic field sources than it was suggested up to now. It is shown also that the validity of reciprocity-like theorems is intimately related to the equality of electromagnetic action and reaction: both of them are fulfilled or violated under the same conditions. Conditions are stated under which reciprocity-like theorems can be violated. A concrete example of their violation is presented.
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 331
Hi Physics Prof,

I have a bunch of articles by Afanasiev if you want any more. The one I sent covers the whole territory, and the other ones focus in on specific aspects.

orthofield
   
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2995
Hi Physics Prof,

I have a bunch of articles by Afanasiev if you want any more. The one I sent covers the whole territory, and the other ones focus in on specific aspects.

orthofield

That would be much appreciated!    O0   I'm learning...
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 331
Hi Physics Prof,

OK, I'll send them one at a time on this list, leaving some time for assimilation.

orthofield
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 331
Hi Physics Prof,

Here's the first one, and a major paper-- 57 pages.
This paper has quite a number of subjects, and is almost a survey paper, except what it is surveying is not known to many!
Pg. 9-12, on the supertoroidal shapes, and pg. 17-19 on the interaction of different EM objects with fields, pg. 21-24 on the magnetic supercurrent in a superconductor, pg. 31 and on, about the oscillating magnetic and electric vector potentials, and the magnetic fields outside an oscillating toroidal field and with a linearly growing current are especially interesting. Then the discussion of higher toroidal orders continues again. And then closed electric toroids, and the electric vector potential outside them, and on..
Some of the material in this paper is theoretical but some is not. For instance, the discussion of "current electrostatics" starting on pg. 41 seems to have been tested extensively in a Russian book that is not in English, by Miller. This technology allows for the creation of a field equivalent to an electric charge in space that is generated by a nearby special coil, but where the field lines do not meet on the surface of this coil, but emanate from the charge alone. 

orthofield

   
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2995
Thanks, Orthofield  O0

My wife and I got up 13 minutes before totality, got some coats on, went out and SAW the blood moon... awesome!

It felt a little like Christmas...  And indeed I thought how on that first Christmas God provided a "sign in the heavens"...
This blood moon is the third in a Tetrad, 4th and last will come on Sept 28, 2015.

Below is the photo I took at about 6:02 am in Spring City, Utah, with my Nikon - near totality.
   
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2995
    EuroPhysicsNews has just published a paper I co-authored (with three colleagues):

http://www.europhysicsnews.org/articles/epn/pdf/2016/04/epn2016474p21.pdf

If someone could place the .PDF here, I would appreciate it as I have some very busy days ahead..

QUOTE

"15 YEARS LATER:
ON THE PHYSICS OF HIGH-RISE BUILDING COLLAPSES
---Steven Jones, Robert Korol, Anthony Szamboti and Ted Walter"
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3867


Buy me some coffee
Hello Steven

No problem i have attached the PDF to this post  O0

Regards
Peter
   
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2995
  Thank you very much, Peter!
Steve
   

Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2840


Buy me a beer
Steven  O0

It is not until you are on the receiving end of things, that you know what some people say is right and not fiction.

Hope your keeping well

Regards

Mike 8)


---------------------------
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860

As a general rule, the most successful person in life is the person that has the best information.
   
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2995
Thanks, Mike.
Quick note about a subject I've been researching and writing about for a decade or so - measuring the value of Big G and why I think it is so elusive to pin down.  Has to do with Lorentz-aether effects, in my view (as I wrote back in 2005!).


Here's a quick overview of the problem as it stands in the physics community:

http://phys.org/news/2014-10-what-is-the-value-of.html

http://phys.org/news/2015-04-gravitational-constant-vary.html


http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/wanted-gravitational-constant-s-true-value/

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/puzzling-measurement-of-big-g-gravitational-constant-ignites-debate-slide-show/

http://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.91.121101
If anyone can get/download the above PhysRevD article - I would much appreciate it!  they want to charge me $25 for it...

More later.
« Last Edit: 2016-09-01, 15:25:59 by PhysicsProf »
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3867


Buy me some coffee
Hi Steve
Is this the document you require or is it a little older version, anyway it's free
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1505.01774v2.pdf
   
Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2995
That's it!   O0
Thanks again, Peter.

Quoting from Scientific American, re: measurements of Big G which don't agree with each other:

Quote
it’s possible that the incompatible measurements are pointing to unknown subtleties of gravity—perhaps its strength varies depending on how it’s measured or where on Earth the measurements are being made?

“Either something is wrong with the experiments, or there is a flaw in our understanding of gravity,” says Mark Kasevich, a Stanford University physicist who conducted an unrelated measurement of big G in 2007 using atom interferometry. “Further work is required to clarify the situation.”

"Either something is wrong with the experiments, or there is a flaw in our understanding of gravity,” -- there is a 3rd alternative!!
   
Group: Guest
Thanks, Mike.
Quick note about a subject I've been researching and writing about for a decade or so - measuring the value of Big G and why I think it is so elusive to pin down.  Has to do with Lorentz-aether effects, in my view (as I wrote back in 2005!).

...............
............

More later.

Hello PhysicsProf,

some time ago I got this information during a phone-talk with a fieind who was in direct contact to the ungarian Physics Professor Dr. Gyula Szasz who had the rare opportunity - as a single privat person - to do a experiment in the drop-tower of Bremen ( Germany ) . Only big companies have the money to pay for such experminents in this institution. So they charged no money for this single experiment.
Intro to ZARM:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QKzcFR5fSY

As long as we repeat old failures from the past will we not gather new insights into "the big G".
So what is the failure we are repeating again and again ?
We use a random mix of elements to perfom the old drop-experiment. Not so Prof. Szasz

Please read the comments below the following video by pressing the button "weiter"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXHhfFa1Cgw

and again the 4 seconds where you can watch what is going on
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkNjvCmsWOU

The crew of the drop-tower was so ethousiastic after this experminent that they wanted to continue with additional tests at no cost for Prof. Szasz but got a call from some "important" physicist in a german institution to stop all work on this.

Here is the only discussion by Prof. Sazs however only in german language which I present to you via google translator:

https://translate.google.de/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fforum.index.hu%2FArticle%2FshowArticle%3Fgo%3D81064567%26t%3D9173847%26token%3Db491233a1798a4b87e15eb5a682313ed&edit-text=

Document about the experiment by Prof. Sazsz in english:

http://web.archive.org/web/20090612070510/http://nmkt.extra.hu/szaszgyula.pdf

Just found his website with a complete description of all succeding events :  http://atomsz.com/



Mike ( germany )



« Last Edit: 2016-09-03, 00:00:29 by Kator01 »
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2502
Everyman decries immorality
Thanks, Mike.
Quick note about a subject I've been researching and writing about for a decade or so - measuring the value of Big G and why I think it is so elusive to pin down.  Has to do with Lorentz-aether effects, in my view (as I wrote back in 2005!).

Lorentz force

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_force

In physics, particularly in electromagnetism, the Lorentz force is the combination of electric and magnetic force on a point charge due to electromagnetic fields. If a particle of charge q moves with velocity v in the presence of an electric field E and a magnetic field B, then it will experience a force

    F = qE + qv × B

(in SI units). Variations on this basic formula describe the magnetic force on a current-carrying wire (sometimes called Laplace force), the electromotive force in a wire loop moving through a magnetic field (an aspect of Faraday's law of induction), and the force on a charged particle which might be travelling near the speed of light (relativistic form of the Lorentz force).

The first derivation of the Lorentz force is commonly attributed to Oliver Heaviside in 1889,[1] although other historians suggest an earlier origin in an 1865 paper by James Clerk Maxwell.[2] Hendrik Lorentz derived it a few years after Heaviside.

Gravitational potential

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_potential

In classical mechanics, the gravitational potential at a location is equal to the work (energy transferred) per unit mass that would be done by the force of gravity if an object were moved from its location in space to a fixed reference location. It is analogous to the electric potential with mass playing the role of charge. The reference location, where the potential is zero, is by convention infinitely far away from any mass, resulting in a negative potential at any finite distance.

In mathematics the gravitational potential is also known as the Newtonian potential and is fundamental in the study of potential theory.

Piezo ignition


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piezo_ignition

Piezo ignition is a type of ignition that is used in portable camping stoves, gas grills and some lighters, and potato cannons.[1] Piezo ignition uses the principle of piezoelectricity, which, in short, is the electric charge that accumulates in some materials in response to high pressure. It consists of a small, spring-loaded hammer which, when a button is pressed, hits a crystal of PZT or quartz crystal. Quartz is piezoelectric, which means that it creates a voltage when deformed. This sudden forceful deformation produces a high voltage and subsequent electrical discharge, which ignites the gas.

No external electric connection is required, though wires are sometimes used to locate the sparking location away from the crystal itself. Piezo ignition systems can be operated by either a lever, push-button or built into the control knob. An electric spark is usually generated once per turn of the knob or press of the button.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2502
Everyman decries immorality
Gravitational constant

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant

The gravitational constant (also known as "universal gravitational constant", or as "Newton's constant"), denoted by the letter G, is an empirical physical constant involved in the calculation of gravitational effects in Sir Isaac Newton's law of universal gravitation and in Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity. Its value is approximately 6.674×10−11 N⋅m2/kg2.

Newton's law of universal gravitation


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_law_of_universal_gravitation

Newton's law of universal gravitation states that a particle attracts every other particle in the universe using a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.[note 1] This is a general physical law derived from empirical observations by what Isaac Newton called induction.[1] It is a part of classical mechanics and was formulated in Newton's work Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica ("the Principia"), first published on 5 July 1687. (When Newton's book was presented in 1686 to the Royal Society, Robert Hooke made a claim that Newton had obtained the inverse square law from him; see the History section below.)

In modern language, the law states: Every point mass attracts every single other point mass by a force pointing along the line intersecting both points. The force is proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.[2] The first test of Newton's theory of gravitation between masses in the laboratory was the Cavendish experiment conducted by the British scientist Henry Cavendish in 1798.[3] It took place 111 years after the publication of Newton's Principia and approximately 71 years after his death.

Newton's law of gravitation resembles Coulomb's law of electrical forces, which is used to calculate the magnitude of the electrical force arising between two charged bodies. Both are inverse-square laws, where force is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the bodies. Coulomb's law has the product of two charges in place of the product of the masses, and the electrostatic constant in place of the gravitational constant.

Newton's law has since been superseded by Einstein's theory of general relativity, but it continues to be used as an excellent approximation of the effects of gravity in most applications. Relativity is required only when there is a need for extreme precision, or when dealing with very strong gravitational fields, such as those found near extremely massive and dense objects, or at very close distances (such as Mercury's orbit around the sun).

General relativity

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity

General relativity (GR, also known as the general theory of relativity or GTR) is the geometric theory of gravitation published by Albert Einstein in 1915[2] and the current description of gravitation in modern physics. General relativity generalizes special relativity and Newton's law of universal gravitation, providing a unified description of gravity as a geometric property of space and time, or spacetime. In particular, the curvature of spacetime is directly related to the energy and momentum of whatever matter and radiation are present. The relation is specified by the Einstein field equations, a system of partial differential equations.

Some predictions of general relativity differ significantly from those of classical physics, especially concerning the passage of time, the geometry of space, the motion of bodies in free fall, and the propagation of light. Examples of such differences include gravitational time dilation, gravitational lensing, the gravitational redshift of light, and the gravitational time delay. The predictions of general relativity have been confirmed in all observations and experiments to date. Although general relativity is not the only relativistic theory of gravity, it is the simplest theory that is consistent with experimental data. However, unanswered questions remain, the most fundamental being how general relativity can be reconciled with the laws of quantum physics to produce a complete and self-consistent theory of quantum gravity.

Einstein's theory has important astrophysical implications. For example, it implies the existence of black holes—regions of space in which space and time are distorted in such a way that nothing, not even light, can escape—as an end-state for massive stars. There is ample evidence that the intense radiation emitted by certain kinds of astronomical objects is due to black holes; for example, microquasars and active galactic nuclei result from the presence of stellar black holes and black holes of a much more massive type, respectively. The bending of light by gravity can lead to the phenomenon of gravitational lensing, in which multiple images of the same distant astronomical object are visible in the sky. General relativity also predicts the existence of gravitational waves, which have since been observed directly by physics collaboration LIGO. In addition, general relativity is the basis of current cosmological models of a consistently expanding universe.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 520
@PhysicsProf

First off, good on you are your team on the 911 publication. One day we will all know the true facts.

About Gravity, here is an angle that may be pertinent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6ftTm34xfk

This is a long video but just look between 43:42 and 59:00. The topic of this video is about PlanetX which may seem farfetched too most but this guy, Gill Broussard has made an analysis that takes real data into account and overlays it to past written accounts. The best rendition of our planets past I could ever find and is actually worth a full viewing but for your specific interest, he provides a small piece of insight that may shed some better light on your own research.

wattsup



---------------------------
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2502
Everyman decries immorality
Structure of the Earth

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_of_the_Earth

The interior structure of the Earth is layered in spherical shells, like an onion. These layers can be defined by their chemical and their rheological properties. Earth has an outer silicate solid crust, a highly viscous mantle, a liquid outer core that is much less viscous than the mantle, and a solid inner core. Scientific understanding of the internal structure of the Earth is based on observations of topography and bathymetry, observations of rock in outcrop, samples brought to the surface from greater depths by volcanoes or volcanic activity, analysis of the seismic waves that pass through the Earth, measurements of the gravitational and magnetic fields of the Earth, and experiments with crystalline solids at pressures and temperatures characteristic of the Earth's deep interior.

Estimating 'little' g from the law of universal gravitation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_of_Earth

Note that this formula only works because of the mathematical fact that the gravity of a uniform spherical body, as measured on or above its surface, is the same as if all its mass were concentrated at a point at its centre. This is what allows us to use the Earth's radius for r.

Newton's law of universal gravitation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_law_of_universal_gravitation

Newton's law of universal gravitation states that a particle attracts every other particle in the universe using a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.[note 1] This is a general physical law derived from empirical observations by what Isaac Newton called induction.[1] It is a part of classical mechanics and was formulated in Newton's work Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica ("the Principia"), first published on 5 July 1687. (When Newton's book was presented in 1686 to the Royal Society, Robert Hooke made a claim that Newton had obtained the inverse square law from him; see the History section below.)

In modern language, the law states: Every point mass attracts every single other point mass by a force pointing along the line intersecting both points. The force is proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.[2] The first test of Newton's theory of gravitation between masses in the laboratory was the Cavendish experiment conducted by the British scientist Henry Cavendish in 1798.[3] It took place 111 years after the publication of Newton's Principia and approximately 71 years after his death.

Newton's law of gravitation resembles Coulomb's law of electrical forces, which is used to calculate the magnitude of the electrical force arising between two charged bodies. Both are inverse-square laws, where force is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the bodies. Coulomb's law has the product of two charges in place of the product of the masses, and the electrostatic constant in place of the gravitational constant.

Newton's law has since been superseded by Einstein's theory of general relativity, but it continues to be used as an excellent approximation of the effects of gravity in most applications. Relativity is required only when there is a need for extreme precision, or when dealing with very strong gravitational fields, such as those found near extremely massive and dense objects, or at very close distances (such as Mercury's orbit around the sun).

Law of gravitation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant

(depending on the choice of definition of the stress-energy tensor also normalized as κ) is also known as Einstein's constant.

Stress–energy tensor

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress%E2%80%93energy_tensor

The stress–energy tensor (sometimes stress–energy–momentum tensor or energy–momentum tensor) is a tensor quantity in physics that describes the density and flux of energy and momentum in spacetime, generalizing the stress tensor of Newtonian physics. It is an attribute of matter, radiation, and non-gravitational force fields. The stress–energy tensor is the source of the gravitational field in the Einstein field equations of general relativity, just as mass density is the source of such a field in Newtonian gravity.


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-05-17, 04:22:19