gravity modification: a review of concepts developed benjamin thomas solomon iseti llc international...

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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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



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



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



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


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


30

ISDC 2007 / iSETI LLC / Ben Solomon Time Dilation Transformation ModelTop Half of Particle, Illustrating Time Dilation Distortion


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


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


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


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


Planetary Center of Mass displacement and Gravitational Acceleration

5/27/2007

36


1000 Suns Center of Mass displacement and Gravitational Acceleration

5/27/2007

37


1000 Suns Change in Time Dilation and Gravitational Acceleration

5/27/2007

38


1000 Suns Change in Time Dilation and Center of Mass Shift

5/27/2007

39


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


Relationship between Radius of Particle & Center of Mass Shift

5/27/2007

42


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


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


5/27/2007

45


A Dissection of a Collision


During collision the particles compress

Time dilation, t >T

After collision the particles separate



After collision the particles separate

5/27/2007

46


Momentum Exchange as a Time Dilation Transformation Model

1 2

3 4

Before Collision

During Collision

5/27/2007

47


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


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


Laithwaite Video

5/27/2007

52


A Video of Solomon’s Experiment

5/27/2007

53


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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)


CONTACT INFORMATIONBen SolomoniSETI LLCP.O. Box 831Evergreen, CO 80439Email: [email protected]: http://www.iseti.us/


mailto:[email protected]

http://www.iseti.us/

gravity modification: a review of concepts developed benjamin thomas solomon iseti llc international...

Documents