Gravitational Magnetic Field

Reflections on fusion history, current events, and predictions for the 'fusion powered future.
SJSVOB
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 5:21 pm
Real name: Stephen Svoboda

Gravitational Magnetic Field

Post by SJSVOB » Mon Mar 27, 2006 8:56 pm

"Scientists funded by the European Space Agency believe they may have measured the gravitational equivalent of a magnetic field for the first time in a laboratory. Under certain special conditions the effect is much larger than expected from general relativity and could help physicists to make a significant step towards the long-sought-after quantum theory of gravity."


http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/GSP/SEM0L6OVGJE_0.html

Sounds a lot like Heim theory and the postulated gravitophotons.

-Steve

User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 11832
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Gravitational Magnetic Field

Post by Richard Hull » Mon Mar 27, 2006 9:39 pm

Seems like way back in the 80's Bruce De Palma (bother of famous director) did some sort of experiment where they spun a magnetic coil gyro up and placed a bulova accutron (tuning fork watch) on the case of the device, (~ 1" from the revolving mass), and with careful testing, it was observed to have either lost or gained time over long periods that it did not in controled "off-device" control tests. (Tuning fork supposedly affected by the acceleratory magneto-grav field).

They were told that the special relativity calcs showed that there was not enough G stuff to affect the watch by many orders of magnitude. Others poo poo'd it via some un-knoiwn magnetic effect on the tuning fork.

Now these new guys tell us the grav effect they measured was one hundred million trillion of times greater than Einstein predicted?

Oh well, I am sure that if it is all true that the De palma work will not be cited.

http://depalma.pair.com/Absurdity/Absur ... ction.html

More data

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/ar ... read=10065


Blurb above is one of his discussions with the usual De palma new energy, new age crap of the period. But he did do the experiment and that make all the difference regardless of his other fluence.

The second blurb discusses the long link with De palma on rotating masses and gravometric oddities. It includes his bonifides and background as a paid scientific researcher for Polaroid before he joined the sunburst community and drifted into free energy.


Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
Retired now...Doing only what I want and not what I should...every day is a saturday.

User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2111
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:50 am
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: Gravitational Magnetic Field

Post by Steven Sesselmann » Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:58 am

I am naturally sceptical of any theory that differs with GR by one hundred
million trillion times....

on the other hand, I don't think GR is the final word on Gravity, dark
matter/energy is getting very upsetting.

Whenever I have a moment to spare I have been puzzling with an idea
that that makes gravity completely obsolete as a separate force. If I can
resolve my idea, Gravity is nothing more than an effect caused by an
inbalance between the Strong force and the Electromagnetic force. The
trick is to prove how only two fundamental opposing forces interact to
cause such a crazy result.....

..attract extremely strongly
..repell very strongly
..attract mildly

well, I have a hunch that it can be done, so I keep trying.

Steven
http://www.gammaspectacular.com - Gamma Spectrometry Systems
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Sesselmann - Various papers and patents on RG

User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 11832
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Gravitational Magnetic Field

Post by Richard Hull » Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:50 pm

I too have felt for some time that gravity might be a result of interactions between already known forces at special ranges found only within matter and not some dreamed up graviton particle.

Still no way to show this though.

Gravitational force, for now, seems just like the coulombic force. They are part of the base forces in the universe. If gravity is linked to interactions between the strong force and EM then only charge will be left with no origin point. This would make it a, base level, totally electric force universe!

The strong force is a secondary force like magnetism as it was never found in nature until the first fusion occurred. Sort of like the first magnetism and photon never existed until charge was accelerated or moved. If gravity is a secondary force then that would be amazing!

My gut tells me it is not secondary, but a primary force like the charge based coulombic force. Though my brain wants it to be secondary; probably through the prejudical conditioning in my rise through science where a unified theory was the darling goal.

I presently hold for only the purely potential energy forces of Gravity and Coulombic forces being the core universal forces.

All other forces both potential and dynamic were born as secondary reactions of these two primaries through matter interactions resulting from the foregoing exchanges of these primal potential energy forces.

The arrows are easily followed and there is no "chicken or egg" conundrum if one really looks at where the core forces might be found and what secondary forces are generated. It is not important how these secondary forces are generated or why they exist. It is far more important to see that there are indeed core forces. Focusing on these will keep us closer to energy solutions and in tune with the wheelwork of the universe. Keeping distant from secondary forces will avoid false starts in search of core level solutions.

Ten or eleven dimensional analysis and stringy thoughts are sweet and mathematically brilliant, but lack a hard solution path to anything beyond theoretical musings. Nothing is seen here that will generate operational, worldly solutions to anything.

Dark Matter and Dark Energy are more modern darlings to chase after. It seems that anything we don't immediately understand or that flies in the face of theory's long accepted as fact, demand a new overarching theory to keep the old ones stable. Science on meth..........trippin' and tickling it own fancy. "Far out man"

I am sure the ultimate shakeout will show an incredibly simple and beautiful relationship long hidden by an overburden of investigative minutia and artifical constructs that were blinding us all.

Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
Retired now...Doing only what I want and not what I should...every day is a saturday.

User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2111
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:50 am
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: Gravitational Magnetic Field

Post by Steven Sesselmann » Tue Mar 28, 2006 9:31 pm

Richard, some nice thoughts there..

As a foundation for my idea, I pose the very simple question that can only
have one of two answers. It is then a matter of choice which answer one
prefers to go with. As usual we go with the one that gives us the simplest
solution. As an exsample we might ask "Does the planets move around
the Sun in a simple elliptic paths?" or "Does the sun and the planets move
around the earth in some kind of complicated way?" Both models are
mathematically feasable but one is rather more simple, so we prefer that
one.

So I state: When the universe was just born and existed as a
homogenous soup of energy with no separately defined space or matter, it
gradually expanded, to a point where matter started to condense leaving
voids of space.

Did the energy stay with the matter? or
Did the matter condense within the energy?

Our assumption after Einstein was that all the energy is tied up in the
matter, however Einstein never said that, he just stated how much energy
mass contains.

My point is therefore that the primordeal soup condensed into space and
matter and that energy was split evenly between the two, and that just as
E=mc^2 there ought to be a similar formula to describe space E=???

If we can find this formula then we can state that all the energy in the
Universe Eu = E(mass)+E(space)

This should solve the dark matter problem, as according to GR, E(space)
ought to contribute to the curvature of space itself. ie space is capable of
curving itself, even without the effect of mass.

Something to think more about..

Steven
http://www.gammaspectacular.com - Gamma Spectrometry Systems
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Sesselmann - Various papers and patents on RG

User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 11832
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Gravitational Magnetic Field

Post by Richard Hull » Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:26 pm

I tend to take another tack on the beginning.

Matter solely as electrons and protons appeared with only the two potential energies found in those two components on matter, coulombic and gravitational, in a void.

How big the void?
How big the separated matter volume?
Who knows?
Who cares?

All concerning the creation event is unknowable for all time and often one well reasoned guess is as good as another.

If a universal infinite blast of energy was the start point, we see no physics that will have bulk matter form from energy. This is an assumption not in evidence.

We see matter capable of being turned into energy rather easily, (fission), (please note that this matter is mass defect and not real charged particulates).

We do not see energy turning into matter that is not gravitationally driven through intense accretion processes (stellar fusion), again, this mass increase is not primary charged particulates but found in nuclear bond mass equivalents.

We do not observe mass created from energy due to an energy expansion process supposed in the big bang. I am a firm believer in a major principle that the two primary charged matter particles cannot be created or destroyed. If they appear to be destroyed they really are only gone for a microsecond or two and are, indeed, seen to return to the universe having only been part of a localized energy balancing act. (pair production-annihilation). I have written on this at some length in earlier postings.

Just some more thoughts that would bear on common sense and observation as opposed to theoretical machinations.

Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
Retired now...Doing only what I want and not what I should...every day is a saturday.

User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2111
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:50 am
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: Gravitational Magnetic Field

Post by Steven Sesselmann » Wed Mar 29, 2006 11:27 am

Richard, I agree with you, that the rest mass of the proton is invariant.
That does not mean that one can not extract all the mass energy from the
particle. By dropping it onto the surface of a neutron star near the
Schwartchild Radius, you can extract near 100% of its mass energy. In
the process, the spatial distance from the observer to the particle has
gone towards infinity. So no rules have been broken..

Theoretically the particle has preserved its rest mass, but that is
hypothetical to the observer, who has extracted the mass energy in
exchange for space.

Just to explain my angle here, I concider the distance from the surface of
the SR Neutron star to the observer to be near infinite if a photon from the
surface never makes it back to the observer.

Physics is wonderful, you can have your cake and eat it too!

Steven
http://www.gammaspectacular.com - Gamma Spectrometry Systems
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Sesselmann - Various papers and patents on RG

User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 11832
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Gravitational Magnetic Field

Post by Richard Hull » Wed Mar 29, 2006 4:01 pm

As for having our cake, it appears much of it is mathematical and theoretical as we have no neutron star at hand to observe such minutia. We take all on mathematical faith and extrapolation, not observation. As for eating it too, imagined, theoretical, cake doesn't fill the belly very well. As such, it is not very atisfying for a starving mind.

There is much that I feel is and will forever be unknowable. In the vastly large we have nothing but models and guesses with no way to go and test ideas due to distance. We make guesses based on extrapolation derived solely from examining various and sundry EM radiations received. This stuff has traveled, in the extreme cases, for billions of years subject to possible diffusion, defraction, refraction, phase and frequency shifting and heaven knows what else that we haven't yet determined to mess with ancient emitted EM plowing through mega and gigalight year thick chunks of gas and gravometrically infected spacial non-voids. This is a bit less than ideal, in itself.

On the microscopic scale, we are absolutely limited by instrumentalities via Heisenberg in determining the absolute physical nature and structure of matter. This, of course doesn't stop all kind of mathematical and extrapolatory handwaving and pronouncements. The standard model which is constantly updated with fixes is a well worn patchwork of guesses and accepted invisible and short lived particulates.

Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
Retired now...Doing only what I want and not what I should...every day is a saturday.

User avatar
Steven Sesselmann
Posts: 2111
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 1:50 am
Real name: Steven Sesselmann
Location: Sydney - Australia
Contact:

Re: Gravitational Magnetic Field

Post by Steven Sesselmann » Thu Mar 30, 2006 8:49 am

Again Richard I agree with much of what you say, cosmologists are
stretching the boundaries too far. Nothing makes me more sleepy that talk
about what happened in the first 300th of a second after the big bang, or
what happens inside or on the boundary of a black hole! For crying out
loud, we haven't even seen one yet!

On the other hand, pure logic can sometimes give us an answer so good
that it just couldn't be any other way, that is what I find really exciting.

The one thing that we have to remove ourselves from is assumption
based on our distorted earthly view of the Universe. This human
weakness has lead us astray so many times, and we are still having
problems with it.

First we thought the earth was FLAT, obviously!
Then we thought the sun and the planets revolved around the earth,
obviously!
Then we thought time and space were absolute, obviously!
Then we thought the universe was static, obviously!

Now are you going to tell me that were not doing that anymore...?

Most people still refer to the stars and the planets as up there, and nothing
is further from the truth.....we live in a local gravity field which in real terms
is very very weak. We should be referring to stars as down there, as
there is a heck of lot more "Down" out there than Up.

Think different, think outside our world.

Steven
http://www.gammaspectacular.com - Gamma Spectrometry Systems
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Steven_Sesselmann - Various papers and patents on RG

User avatar
Richard Hull
Moderator
Posts: 11832
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:44 pm
Real name: Richard Hull

Re: Gravitational Magnetic Field

Post by Richard Hull » Thu Mar 30, 2006 4:22 pm

I am always willng to listen to well argued points that lead to sensible possibilities. It is always tough to think far outside of physical experience.

The Mother Goose tales and the brothers Grim were experts at this. The internet is loaded with outside of box, outside of common sense, and outside of reason expositions.

Just because another human with a degree or a wad of degreed adherents posit an idea, doesn't lead me to anything extra on their behalf than a more careful listen. It is most disconcerting to see supposed people at the top of their game working light years beyond provable or applicable concepts. It gives me more than a little pause.

The difference, I am sure, is that between my being a working engineer and their being theoreticians. What greater gulf could exist than that between someone who has to make his daily bread making things happen and work properly from ideas and concepts and those who plumb depths six theoretical levels down below Heisenberg or consider hypothesized entities billions of light years out and billions of years back in time. They are a lot safer than I in their work. My bosses expect a level of results far removed from what their bosses expect.

Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
Retired now...Doing only what I want and not what I should...every day is a saturday.

Post Reply