Taylor J. Smith
I am interested in factors that affect G, the universal
constant of gravitation. Kozyrev's work seems to bear
on this question, and I would appreciate discussion of this.
NTC COM-Center wrote:
In the 50's, in order to verify his theory,
N.A.Kozyrev conducted a series of experiments
with gyroscopes. He found that the weight of a spinning gyroscope
depends upon its angular velocity and direction of rotation. ...
Note that N.A.Kozyrev emphasized that spinning
gyroscope should be subjected to the special vibrations
in order to observe its weight variations. In the absence
of vibrations the weight of a spinning gyroscope would not change. Thus
to achieve the weight variation the rotation should be nonstationary.
From: "Kedrick Brown"
Terry Blanton posted on 2/12:
"Indeed! One must also wonder if the results obtained by
Podkletnov,Schnurer, et. al. are due to the "synchronization"
of the torsion fields of the lattice ions as they orbit/spin
about the latticenodes."
Kedrick Brown wrote:
Barnett's effect means that the quantum particles in any spinning
macroscopic object are going to be spin polarized by that object's
rotation (Barnett's effect is a fundamental inertial effect).
So this definitely should occur in a spinning superconductor
(i.e. the lattice ions should be spin-polarized to a degree).
However there are many other things about Podkletnov's
effect that are kind of puzzling, such as
1) No anomalous gravitational effects observed under the superconductor
2) Cylindrical shape of the gravitational shielding cylinder
This seems to suggest that IF Podkletnov's effect is real, that the
superconductor MAY have emitted gravitational radiation
from its upper face (as opposed to shielding the earth's gravitational
field through a complicated quantum process), similar to what
Fontana has suggested:
In fact, Wallace details in US Pat# 3626605 how gravitational
radiation can be used to create localized zones of reduced gravity!
Wallace's patents had previously show that changing spin-polarization of
lattice ions in a material is capable of producing gravitational
radiation. So there definitely seems to be a connection between
torsion fields and gravity.
... Wallace outlines a very simple scientific method of
observing the "kinemassic" (torsion) field in US Pat# 3626606.
It involves the use of two semiconductor probes
("a differential magnetic probe for an FW Bell
gaussmeter," as he puts it - which conventionally
"provide a measure of magnetic field intensity from both
AC and DC sources, via the Hall effect").
The important thing is that these probes are polarity
sensitive with respect to magnetic field readings but
NOT polarity sensitive with respect to the direction of
crystal lattic vibrations, which means that you can use a
voltage developed across them to sense their extent of nuclear
spin-polarization (without having to worry about magnetic fields
influencing your results - see his patent!!!).
THIS I THINK IS AN OPTIMUM METHOD FOR
MEASURING THE PRESENCE OF TORSION FIELDS
- simply measure the extent of lattice vibrations in such probes.
What do you all think?
Tim Vaughan wrote:
It seems like it might work better with a large hall effect crystal.
How could one make and employ such a crystal as a torsion detector ?
Tim
Preprint
Fontana Paper
A possibility of emission of high frequency gravitational radiation from
d-wave to s-wave type superconductor junctions.
by Giorgio Fontana
Faculty of Science, University of Trento, 38050 Povo, TN, Italy.
... The observed effects were attributed to a possible
gravitational shielding; this hypothesis is not corroborated
by any currently accepted theory or other supporting experiments,
nor the observed region of "interaction", which has exactly the shape
of the superconducting disk or toroid for distances of many disk
diameters from the device surface, is compatible with a static field
modification. On the contrary it is compatible with a beam of
millimetric or submillimetric gravitational radiation generated by the
decay of Cooper-pairs. The emission is orthogonal to the
plane of the junction where small domains should have emitted
coherent and thus beamed gravitational radiation,
... It has been already shown that gravitational radiation may
transfer energy and momentum (10), because of that, the repulsive
effect observed in (8) (9) could be a straightforward consequence
of this property of gravitational radiation. ...
References.
Hi all,
So again we return to the question of "Is gravity a push or a
pull?" I guess the math come out the same either way.
Jack Smith
From: "Kedrick Brown"
Hi all:
Just wanted to thank Colin Quinney
publicly for his mention (in a private communication) of the
connection between spin-fields and heat, which I referred to in
my last email. He suggested use of a temperature probe for detecting
spin-fields. Basically, the last few spin-field detection methods
we have discussed are actually forms of temperature probes.
According to Wallace,
application of a spin field to a substance both reduces the specific
heat of that substance and increases its electrical conductivity
(i.e. lowers its resistance). So a resistor should be adequate for
detecting spin fields. Note that resistance thermometers already exist
for temperature (as opposed to spin field) measurement purposes (their
resistance varies with temperature in a known curve).
Also of course, the InAs Hall effect probe that
Wallace used was a form of temperature probe, as my last
post showed. The 11 degree centigrade
reduction in probe temperature that he observed is huge!
Perhaps also a thermocouple connected to a sample of
appropriate material would be useful. Wallace mentions in
3626606 that a thermocouple is not measurably affected by
spin-fields, so it might be good for monitoring the
temperature of a substance that is.
Kedrick
Date: Sun, 07 Mar 1999 15:18:12 +0000
NTC COM-Center wrote:
Note that N.A.Kozyrev emphasized that spinning
gyroscope should be subjected to the special vibrations
in order to observe its weight variations. In the absence
of vibrations the weight of a spinning gyroscope would not change.
Dan Ghiocel wrote:
Do you have any details, description, or experimental
results regarding this "special" vibrations? ...
Regards, Dan Ghiocel, dan@ghiocel.com
Hi Dan,
The following are some excerpts from
"Possibility Of Experimental Study Of Properties Of Time"
[Unpublished article by N. A. Kozyrev: English title as
above; Pulkovo, "O VOZMOZHNOSTI EKSPERIMENTAL'NGO
ISSLEDOVANIYA SVOYSTV VREMENI", Russian, September 1967, pp 1-49]
... However ...it was noted that in the transmission of
the vibrations from the gyroscope to the support of the
weights variations in the readings of the weights can
appear, depending on the velocity and direction of rotation
of the gyroscopes.... From these observations, a series of
tests with these gyroscopes developed. ...
The support areas in the form
of caps are also convenient by virtue of the fact that with
them we can conduct the suspension of gyroscopes rotating
by inertia. A gyroscope suspended on a rigid support can
transmit through a yoke its vibrations to support of the
weights. With a certain type of vibration, which was
chosen completely by feel, there occurred a considerable
decrease in the effect of the gyroscope upon the weights
during its rotation in a counter - clockwise direction, if
we examined it from above. During rotation in a clockwise
direction, under the same conditions, the readings of the
weights remained practically unchanged.
Measurements conducted with gyroscopes of varying weight and rotor
radius, at various angular velocities, indicated that a
reduction in the weight ... is actually proportional to
the weight and to the linear rate of rotation.
For example, at a rotation of the gyroscope (D
= 4.6 cm, Q = 90 gr, u = 25 m/sec), we obtained the weight
difference Q = -8 mg. With rotation in a clockwise
direction, it always turned out that Q = 0. However, with
a horizontal arrangement of the axis, in azimuth, we found
the average value Q = -4 mg.
From this, we can conclude
that any vibrating body under the conditions of these
experiments should indicate a reduction in weight. ...
Terry Blanton wrote:
If I am not mistaken, Schnurer witnessed AG effects *without*
spinning the disk. This implies that the ions orbiting their
lattice nodes alone is capable of generating a gravity field once
the phonons are minimized. This effect would be maximized at
absolute zero, ie no lattice phonons at all -- only lattice orbits.
However, I would think that macroscopic spinning would increase the
effect as long as *the torsion fields were additive*. What does
*additive* mean? I'm not sure. :-) Maybe it means that the
rotation must be clockwise for both the macroscopic and the
microscopic masses. (Or anticlockwise)
Either way, I think an external magnetic field is important. I am
awaiting a copy of some work by Dr. Li in the mail which, as I
recall, said that, contrary to the BCS theory, some of an externally
applied magnetic field indeed *does* penetrate into the
superconductor. This field would serve to align the ion
orbit/rotational axes and maybe affect their precession.
Terry
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 12:44:17 -0800
Harvey Morgan's Experiment
While the physics establishment waits patiently for the results of the
Stanford/NASA gravity probe B experiment to provide phsyical evidence
of the gravitomagnetic field/spin field/torsion field,
existing experimental evidence continues to be largely ignored.
A summary of identified
existing experiments is presented in the references below. The
list of experiments provided below is surely incomplete. Additional
examples would be appreciated.
In January 1998, an unusually simple experiment was reported by
Harvey Morgan (1).
Quoting from page 8 and 9 of his paper:
"A mechanical experiment confirmed that momentum is indeed a field
phenomena. A 2 pound lead flywheel was mounted on the shaft of a
small, very high speed (26,500 rpm advertised) electric motor. Another
flywheel was mounted on a ball-bearing shaft aligned with the motor
shaft.
The two flysheel's parallel faces were separated by about 1/16 inch.
When the motor was energized, it accelerated
the lead flywheel toward its top rated speed. The other flywheel,
in response to the changing angular velocity and momentum of the lead
flywheel, started turning briskly -- in the opposite direction! The
changing momentum field of the lead flywheel induced a torque in the
other flywheel across an airgap. Newtonian mechanics does not predict
that reaction."
"When the electric motor was turned off
before reaching top speed, the other flywheel
stopped turning. It then started turning slowly in the same direction
as the lead flywheel, urged by the collapsing momentum field and
the air coupling between flywheels."
Regards, Robert Stirniman
References - Experimental Evidence of the Gravitomagnetic Field
1.) Harvey Morgan, "Now We Can Explore the Universe", IEEE AES Systems
Magazine, January 1988, pp3-10. The angular momentum field, is
demonstrated to couple across an air-gap between two flywheels,
resulting in behaviour remarkably similar to magnetic induction.
2.) US Patent No 3626605, Method and Apparatus for Generating a
Secondary Gravitational Force Field, Henry Wm Wallace, Ardmore
PA, Dec 14, 1971. Wallace's first patent. The gravitomagnetic
field is named the kinemassic field. The patent describes the
embodiment of his experiment. An additional embodiment of the
invention (Figures 7, 7A, and 7B) describes how a time varying
gravitomagnetic field can be used to shield the primary
background gravitoelectric field. Available on the web at
First Wallace Patent
3.) US Patent No 3626606, Method and Apparatus for Generating a
Dynamic Force Field, Henry Wm Wallace, Ardmore PA, Dec 14, 1971.
Wallace's second patent provides a variation of his experiment. A
type III-V semiconductor material (Indium Arsenide), of which
both materials have unpaired nuclear spin, is used as an
electronic detector for the gravitomagnetic field. The experiment
demonstrates that the material in his gravitomagnetic field
circuit has hysterisis and remanence effects analogous to
magnetic materials. Available on the web at
Second Wallace Patent
4.) US Patent No 3823570, Heat Pump, Henry Wm Wallace, 60 Oxford
Drive, Freeport NY, July 16, 1974 Wallace’s third patent
provides an additional variation of his experiment. Wallace
demonstrates that by aligning the nuclear spin of materials
having an odd number of nucleons, order is created in the
material, resulting in a change in specific heat.
5.) International Journal of Theoretical Physics, K. Nordtvedt,
Vol 27, p1395-1403. 1988. The gravitomagnetic field is indirectly
detected by astronomical observations of the periastron precession
rate of the binary pulsar PSR 1913+16.
6.) Test of the Lense-Thirring Orbital Shift Due to Spin, Ignazio
Ciufolini, Federico Chieppa, David Lucchesi, and Francesco Vespe.
Classical and Quantum Gravitation, Vol 14 p2710-2726. 1997.
The gravitomagnetic field which results from the earth's rotation
is experimentally detected and measured by laser tracking of the
LAGEOS II satellite. The results agree with the Lense-Thirring
derivation from General Relativity.
7.) A Possibility of Gravitational Force Shielding by Bulk
YBa2Cu3O7-x Superconductor, E. Podkletnov and R. Nieminen,
Physica C Vol. 203, p. 441, (1992). Podkletnov describes an
experiment where a 2% reduction in weight is created in a mass
suspended over a levitated and rotating super-conductor disk. A
detailed compilation of information about this experiment is
available on the web at
Podkletnov
8.) Weak Gravitational Shielding Properties of Composite Bulk
Yba2Cu3O7-x Superconductor Below 70K Under EM Field, Eugene
Podkletnov, LANL Physics Preprint Server, Cond-Mat/9701074,
January 1997. Podkletnov provides greater detail about his
experimental apparatus and the construction of the superconductor
disk. Available on the web at
More Podkletnov
From: "Kedrick Brown"
Hi Robert:
Your recent compilation of experimental detection of
gravitomagnetism was excellent. I just wanted to add
one more to the list. The Rossi X-Ray timing explorer
(NASA) evidence (evidence of gravitomagnetism in disks of
gas around a black hole). See:
Rossi
On this page, Gravity Probe B is called a "second method
for measuring frame dragging." So I think the existence of
gravitomagnetism is already accepted, except that its
generally believed to be an extremely tiny effect
due to the virtually infinitesmal coupling constant.
Many experiments that seem to prove otherwise
(like Wallace's and other torsion field experiments)
directly contradict this supposition, and so without
extremely rigorous tests and retests of these anomalous effects,
will probably remain generally unaccepted by the overall
scientific community. Whereas tests that confirm the general
relativistic view will of course not meet a lot of resistance in
the same scientific community.
Kedrick
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 00:22:56 -0800
Kedrick Brown wrote:
Hi All:
Thanks to Colin Quinney for reminding me.
Francis Niepher did a modified Cavendish experiment
to detect the existence of gravitoelectric fields
created by electric fields, published in Transactions of the Academy of
Science of St. Louis, vol. 23, 1916 and 1917
Kedrick
Colin Quinney wrote;
I've condensed the following from 'Homemade Lightning' by R.A. Ford, 2nd
Ed., 1996:
Dr. Francis Nipher, Professor of physics, Washington University,
St. Louis, Missouri. He performed a modified Cavendish
experiment 1916-17, where he suspended with a 180 cm. silk thread,
a 1" lead ball [test mass] within an iron box [Faraday cage].
The other mass was a 10" lead sphere, and it was electrified
with an electrostatic generator. A wire connected the 10" ball
to the Faraday box. (same potential.) The test mass was inside and fully
insulated though, and, after 20 minutes, it deflected with an estimated
repulsive force of 2 X the 'calculated' gravitational attractive force.
Polarity made no difference.
Replacing the large mass with a hollow box had NO effect on
the test mass, proving that this was an electrogravity interaction.
Full details are published in Transactions of the Academy of
Science of St. Louis, vol. 23, 1916 and 1917. An interesting effect to
note was that a smaller but definite repulsion was noted when a small AC
current was sent through the large lead ball instead of the high static
charge.
Note the 20 minute duration before the full effects were
felt by the test ball. I think that's important.
There is an additive or an accumulation here. We see
this reported often with electro-gravity type experiments.
Even with Wallace.
Dr Niepher also did the test in 1917 with a
Torsion Balance using two test balls and two 10"
lead weights. He obtained the same results. Does anyone
here have a Cavindish type balance?
There are other references to other electrogravity experiments
of that period. One was in 'The Electrical Experimenter', March 1918,
where an electrostatic generator of very high potential
(est. 500 KV.) caused small 1 and 2 gram objects of various
conductive or nonconductive materials to
float. This is NOT normal electrostatic phenomena.
Colin
For Further Information:
To: vortexC-L@eskimo.com
Subject: Torsion Fields and Podkletnov's effect
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 20:17:24 -0500
To: vortexC-L@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Torsion fields and The Wallace Patents
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 1999 12:26:24 -0500
From: "Taylor J. Smith"
To: vortexC-L@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: torsion field detectors
From: Robert Stirniman
To: VortexC-L@eskimo.com
Subject: Harvey Morgan's Experiment
To: vortexC-L@eskimo.com
Subject: Experimental detection of gravitomagnetism
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 07:53:00 -0500
To: vortexC-L@eskimo.com
From: Quinney
Subject: Re: Electricity-Gravity experiment