Posts by Zephir_AWT


    any GR gravitational effect on length of day due to the extra potential from Jupiter is far too small to be so measured

    Value of gravitational constant fluctuates with the same period as well. And value of gravitational constant is measured with precision of some five digits only, whereas length of day can be measured with millisecond precision, i.e. by at least eight digits precission. The synoptic Jupiter-Saturn period is thus clearly visible there.

    wFTfKZpl.jpg  qJgH5uTl.png

    These periods can be seen even by such a seemingly unrelated processes like the speed of uplift of Yellowstone caldera.



    Unluckily experiments down on earth on different altitudes did not yet show a different speed of light. Thus we should not discuss about things we can't measure as the decision is made by experiments and not by theory.

    After then the observations like Shapiro delay or gravitational lensing shouldn't be possible. I already explained here that constant speed of light applies only to INTRINSIC perspective, where observer is allowed to deform his time and meter rule together with space-time (i.e. with using lasers prototypes of time and space). Under such a situation the speed of light would be really invariant, because it's defined so by SI unit system. But I'm pretty sure, that if we would use good old iridium meter prototype we would measure different speed of light even here at Earth.


    May be you should ask how many moles are in a bottle

    The link says 50 liters and you'll get pure dry deuterium gas not contaminated by hydrogen from electrolyte and you'll save for electrolyzer.

    12 liters package costs 120 Euro in my country and it's readily available - I can have it at home in three days.

    Regarding the storage, in my country one can order via post and handle thirty kilo of propanbutane at home (incl. panel house with exception of bedroom) without any restrictions - people are often using it for cooking.

    MO it's "environmental" BS: just one of many attempts how to store energy in reversible chemical reactions: When limestone is heated up to 500 Celsius (930 Fahrenheit) degrees the water evaporates leaving a charged dry calcium oxide, which can react with water under release of heat. The "salt" medium is natural limestone with high levels of volumetric energy density with silica-based (water glass) coating material. With normal uncoated salt, the lime crystals clump together and charge-discharge-capacity is limited to no more than 50 cycles. The coating should prohibit limestone crystals from sticking together which would reduce storage capacity and durability. Compare that to the nano-coated salt which can be used through thousands of cycles of charge and discharge. I The process can absorb ten times more energy than water per unit of weight, which is currently used for power-to-heat facilities. With compare to batteries at industrial scales, the lime is perfectly safe, chemically stable and noncorosive. And unlike tanks of hot water, which slowly cool down over time, the system can retain the chemically-trapped energy for far longer. Need heat? Just add water. And resulting steam can get hot enough (over 500 °C) to directly power steam turbines.

    Like I said, vacuum behaves like foam: if we squeeze it in one direction, it will expand in another one. From this aspect of behavior duality of magnetic and electric fields and also SO(4,2) symmetry follows


    But behavior of real foam is more complex and it gets more dense when it gets shaken or deformed too much. Fine structure constant says, that if we squeeze vacuum in some direction, it also gets more dense in 1/137 ratio, i.e. it brings proportionality of mass and gravitational lensing to charge. Therefore the SO(2) symmetry will get always broken and existence of photons (gauge boson in generals) follows. Without it all forces would be mediated by harmonic spherical waves only

    IMO the presence of black holes would be destructive anyway, as it should lead to decomposition of existing forces. This is pretty interesting problem actually. In dense aether model the scalar field of gravitating bodies should behave like solvent of all physical bonds. We actually observational indicia for it - for example the annual changes of gravitational constant and rotational speed of Earth coincide. Dense aether model implies, that when massive planets emerge along a single line, then the more dense volume area of vacuum residing there makes massive bodies more lightweight and their gravitational force weaker. So that the Earth expands once it emerges on connection line of Sun with Jupiter and it should also become more lightweight and rotate faster during it.

    qGXs1Ts.gif x15MToV.gif rsZhAhU.gif

    It means, that center of galaxies - despite it looks composed of normal matter - would actually become unstable, if we would raise it from gravitational well and vice-versa. The process of transport across gravitational potential is what is considered as a time arrow in general relativity - it would also make this matter older and collapsed in expanding Universe model. At any case, this model has consequences for theory of Hawking radiation, accretion and cosmology. In classical theory the accretion radiation arises, when massive particles collide mutually during their fall into black holes. So that if we put the matter into black hole sufficiently slowly, it should get all quietly consumed by black hole. But in dense aether model roughly half of its matter should be converted into radiation no matter how finely and slowly it falls into black hole.

    Existence of aether doesn't violate density fluctuations of it and existence of Higgs field - on the contrary. Thanks to Brownian noise we can observe Higgs-like effects even for vortices at the water surface. And similarly to vacuum we can observe them there both at small scales, both largest scales. Casimir and Yukawa forces are also evidence of Higgs field. The presence of Higgs field would also occasionally break SO(2) symmetry, which is maybe why Wyttenbach doesn't like it.

    Helical engine is based on theorem of relativity that massive particles cannot be accelerated to speed of light, as it would increase their relativist mass. This mechanism is clearly inefficient and on par with effectiveness of photon rocket. But there are indicia, that speed of light limit is valid only for uncharged particles and these charged ones have this limit much lower. Under such a situation the above principle could work way better with charged particles, than the relativity theory implies.

    In addition, inside superconductors and topological insulators like graphene the motion of electrons is limited to a narrow planes or stripes, which gives them very high speed, so that this limit can be further decreased and even mechanical motion could induce interaction of electrons with vacuum (Podkletnov-Poher experiments). In my opinion, the motion of electrons can be constrained by even simpler way by their attaching to surface of electrodes within capacitor (1). The high dielectric constant of ceramic capacitors would lower speed of electromagnetic wave propagation even more, therefore electrons would interact with vacuum even under much lower speed - this is IMO principle on which Woodward drive can work. On youtube we can find intriguing experiments with rotating charged capacitors or induction coils loaded with high voltage, which move even being enclosed with cover, so that ionic wind effects cannot apply there.

    Therefore the principle of helical engine can be actually quite feasible once we realize, that the speed limit for light propagation can be greatly lowered in various dielectric and that instead of modulation of speed of charge carriers we can modulate their dielectric constant or relative permeability or both.


    He has stated clearly that he thinks QM and the SM are incomplete at best, so no amount of arguing with him that refers back to the QM and CERN data will be taken in account because he has done the calculations with his SO(4) model and thinks he has a better explanation for those measurements.

    Why not - but adhering on math and ignoring rational arguments is exactly what Wyttenbach criticizes about mainstream physicists. He is not any different - just outnumbered one...;-)
    I can see sorta duality here.

    At least Mills is doing some research and experiments. This area of research doesn't favor theorists - only experimentalists can get finally success here. Mills is about to realize it too I guess. BTW Mills reported a COP over 37 in his nickel - aqueous potassium carbonate solutions in cheap and simple arrangement in similar way, like Notoya, Niedra, Patterson and many others.

    Why no one (including Mills himself) is trying to replicate these seminal experiments goes over my head. Such a disgust for replications is simply unexplainable.

    In dense aether model space-time looks like foam at all scales, because this is how density fluctuations of very dense particle environment (aka supercritical fluid) look like. The foam has dodecahedral geometry of Weaire Phelan foam and Higgs bosons will be nodes of this foam after then. For me Higgs boson is thus as real as density fluctuations of dark matter, I just expect that observations of multiple Higgs bosons in dilepton decay channels will be confirmed. So that my attitude is exactly opposite than Mr. Wittenbach's one: I'm not only believing that Higgs boson is real - I even think that mainstream physicists cover existence of another Higgs bosons before public (for their own bad, for bad of SuSy theorists in particular). BTW Higgs boson has been itself proposed for to make Standard Model more complete - so it's a bit nonsensical to argue it with incompleteness of Standard Model.



    Such a reactionless drive would thus confirm the laws of physics rather than violate them. But that energy for particle acceleration has to come from somewhere, so let's say it comes from a battery: then the energy in the battery contributes to the mass of the box via E = mc², so the total mass is unchanged and nothing happens. Now let's say the energy comes from outside: in order to produce meaningful thrust, you need to be able to shed this mass, and in order to conserve momentum, it'll have to be shed preferentially in one direction... my man, that's a jet engine.

    BTW the 165 megawatts of power predicted to generate just 1 newton of thrust comparable to this one required by classical photon rocket, where single newton of thrust requires 300 MWatts of power and which at least has the virtue of making sense..