BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Laboratory >

Burkhard Heim

  
  

Page: 1(2)

 
 
Mirror
19:12 / 12.01.06
Einstein's equivalence principle states that it is impossible to distinguish between a uniform acceleration and a uniform gravitational field.

I'm completely failing to grok this. Is Einstein stating that this is true for any given point, or can you have a pair of points at which you are measuring the effect? If the latter is the case, since the accelleration induced by gravity is in an inverse square relationship with respect to distance to the center of mass, why couldn't you determine that you were in a gravitational field by measuring the acceleration of two objects dropped from different distances from the center of mass?
 
 
Wombat
19:36 / 12.01.06
Grant - Einstein didn`t refute the rock thing. He stated that inertial mass and gravitational mass where impossible to distinguish. (note - he never said they were the same thing).
(His exact phrasing uses forces)
Hence the rock, just an example of equivalence principle that everyone can grasp in an instant.

As for the drive.... Just as a magnet has an attractive pole and a repulsive pole gravity (according to Heim..not me) has an attractive element and a repulsive element.
The drive generates the repulsive element and repels both earth and ships mass. In deep space only the ships mass is repelled.

An inertial drive allows you to ignore the effects of mass. This isn`t what has been claimed.
 
 
Wombat
19:40 / 12.01.06
Aaah. Mirror.

Imagine a scientist was weighing things in a spaceship.
It has no windows and our scientist has forgotten where the ship is.

Basically Einstein states that there is no experiment he can do that can distinguish between a 1g accelaration and 1g generated by sitting still on a planet with 1g gravity.
(Once again ..he didn`t say they were the same thing.)
 
 
Wombat
19:44 / 12.01.06
Abstract as requested.

Abstract. This paper describes a novel space propulsion technique, based on an extension of a unified field theory in
a quantized, higher-dimensional space, developed by the late B. Heim (1977) in the 50s and 60s of the last century,
termed Heim Quantum Theory (HQT). As a consequence of the unification, HQT predicts six fundamental
interactions. The two additional interactions should enable a completely different type of propulsion, denoted
gravitophoton field propulsion. The fifth interaction, termed gravitophoton force, would accelerate a material body
without the need of propellant. Gravitophoton interaction is a gravitational like force, mediated by gravitophoton
particles that come in both types, attractive and repulsive. Gravitophoton particles are generated in pairs from the
vacuum itself by the effect of vacuum polarization (virtual electrons), under the presence of a very strong magnetic
field (photons). Due to gravitophoton pair production, the total energy extracted from the vacuum is zero. Attractive
gravitophotons interact with matter, and thus can become real particles, exacting a force on a material body.
Repulsive gravitophotons have a much smaller cross section and do not interact with matter. Consequently, the
kinetic energy of the accelerated material body would come from the vacuum, satisfying the second condition, i.e., a
low energy budget for space propulsion. The name gravitophoton has been chosen because a transformation of
photons into gravitational energy should take place. The third condition for advanced spaceflight, superluminal
speed, may be realized by transition into a parallel space, in which covariant laws of physics are valid, with a
limiting speed of light nc, where n is an integer and c is the vacuum speed of light. In order to achieve such a
transition, the sixth fundamental interaction would be needed, termed vacuum field (or quintessence), which is a
weakly repulsive gravitational like force, mediated by the vacuum particle, being formed by the interaction of
repulsive gravitophotons with the gravitons of the spacecraft. The paper discusses the source of the two predicted
interactions, the concept of parallel space, and presents the physical model along with an experimental setup to
measure and estimate the gravitophoton force. Estimates for the magnitude of magnetic fields are presented, and trip
times for lunar and Mars missions are given.
 
 
Mirror
19:46 / 12.01.06
That's just what I'm questioning, though. Here's the experiment I propose:

Since the ship's undergoing acceleration, there will be a "down."

Put a pendulum at opposite ends of the ship, in a line parallel to the direction of "down", and measure the deflection of each pendulum. In a gravitational field generated by an external object, it should be possible to detect a difference in the deflection of the pendulums due to the acceleration generated by gravity at one end of the ship being very, very slightly less than that at the other. Or if not, why not?
 
 
Wombat
20:14 / 12.01.06
Mirror - bloody good question. Had to run to a textbook to find the answer. ( I`m horrified that it`s a question I never thought to ask).

The answer is...I oversimplified the elevator example.
I should have included the word "local" and explained it..(1 point only allowed).
 
 
Quantum
14:57 / 13.01.06
Also Einstein means that you couldn't distinguish between a rock thrown at you, or you thrown at the rock (if you're both floating in the void).

The drive generates the repulsive element

A gravitic Monopole?

Repulsive gravitophotons have a much smaller cross section and do not interact with matter. Consequently, the kinetic energy of the accelerated material body would come from the vacuum,

Holy shit, like zero point energy and grav drives combined! That explains the gravitic monopole, gravity is polarised and we only perceive one alignment.

The third condition for advanced spaceflight, superluminal speed, may be realized by transition into a parallel space, in which covariant laws of physics are valid, with a limiting speed of light nc, where n is an integer and c is the vacuum speed of light.

We go to a parallel world where FTL is possible- let's call it Hyperspace. :-)

In order to achieve such a transition, the sixth fundamental interaction would be needed, termed vacuum field (or quintessence), which is a weakly repulsive gravitational like force, mediated by the vacuum particle, being formed by the interaction of repulsive gravitophotons with the gravitons of the spacecraft.

Urbleburblenurble, my fricking brain is imploding. Quintessence? Don't the Sons of Ether use that as starship fuel in Mage the RPG? To violate consensual reality and utilise mad science theories that allow hyperspatial travel?

In Mage, there is an underlying framework to reality called the Tapestry... At the most basic level, the Tapestry is composed of something called Quintessence, the essence of magic and what is real
 
 
grant
15:17 / 13.01.06
I have another question that I can't quite form exactly. I'll do my best, but if I make a mess, I apologize.

OK, recently, Scientific American had a cover story about black holes and what they called "the return of the Ether." The idea is that mathematically, they've found that particles approaching black holes act analogously to sounds traveling in fluids moving through a constriction -- that the event horizon is mathematically, on an atomic (sub-atomic?) level, a lot like the 3/4" to 1/2" adapter in my sprinkler system.

That much I got.

One of the strange conclusions of this modeling, though, was the idea that the space around the black hole behaves like a fluid -- that the vacuum was actually a medium that can have waves and boundaries and reflections and stuff. That it was like ether.

Is that related to this quintessence idea? It seems like gravity is wrapped up in all this somehow, but I was lousy in physics class.
 
 
Quantum
18:44 / 16.01.06
Luminiferous Aether was the medium of light, when they thought it had to be a wave in something, famously disproved by Michelson and Morley (bastards) who showed there was no such thing.
"...the mechanical qualities of the aether had become more and more magical: it had to be a fluid in order to fill space, but one that was millions of times more rigid than steel in order to support the high frequencies of light waves, massless, completely transparent, non-dispersive, incompressible, continuous, and without viscosity.
By the early 20th Century, aether theory was in trouble: A series of increasingly complex experiments had been carried out in the late 1800s to try to detect the motion of earth through the aether, and had failed." (from the wikipedia entry linked)

So you can see why they refer to it, it's a handy theory.

Quintessence was the stuff Platonic Ideals were made of Here's an article on the Physics version from 2000, here's an excerpt-

"In cosmology, quintessence is a real form of energy distinct from any normal matter or radiation, or even "dark matter". Its bulk properties - energy density, pressure and so forth - lead to novel behaviour and unusual astrophysical phenomena. So far its existence has only been inferred indirectly from a range of observations, but a number of current and planned experiments will make direct searches for this elusive form of energy."

So it's a theoretical new energy that acts weirdly. (any Mage players reading this? Ringing any bells?)
 
 
Henningjohnathan
18:04 / 14.07.06
That's just what I'm questioning, though. Here's the experiment I propose:

Since the ship's undergoing acceleration, there will be a "down."

Put a pendulum at opposite ends of the ship, in a line parallel to the direction of "down", and measure the deflection of each pendulum. In a gravitational field generated by an external object, it should be possible to detect a difference in the deflection of the pendulums due to the acceleration generated by gravity at one end of the ship being very, very slightly less than that at the other. Or if not, why not?

Let's look at it a few different ways.

Let's say that the ship is free falling toward the earth influenced by the "gravitational field of the earth" - could you detect a difference between the two pendulums?

Doubtful, because everything is falling uniformly toward the center of gravity, so it would all be weightless. There would be no apparent acceleration inside the ship.

No let's say that you are rocketing directly away from the Earth, would the pendulum in the tail section (closer to the earth) of the ship be slightly different than a pendulum at the nose (farther from the earth)?

I don't think so, because the relative acceleration of the ship compared to the earth would be the same.

Now, if a ship was flying in an arc that curved over the Earth neither directly toward or away from the planet, would the pendulums act differently based upon their relative position to the planet?

I'd suspect so, but not necessarily unless the ship was about the same size as the planet since the ship itself, whether it is accelerating or not, will react with the same uniformity when it comes under the Earth's accelerative influence.
 
  

Page: 1(2)

 
  
Add Your Reply