Paradoxes Resolved, Origins Illuminated - Gravitational Engineering

Paradoxes Resolved, Origins Illuminated - Gravitational Engineering - A Basic Transceiver

Paradoxes Resolved, Origins Illuminated

Username:	Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

All Forums

Astrophysics

Gravity & Relativity

Gravitational Engineering - A Basic Transceiver

New Topic

Reply to Topic

Printer Friendly

Author

Topic

Page: of 3

Larry Burford

USA
1355 Posts

Posted - 21 Apr 2003 : 11:40:50

One of the more common themes in the various incarnations of the SOG debate between Dr. Van Flandern and others on USENET and in other venues is the difference (or lack thereof) between gravity waves and changes in the gravitational acceleration field. It puzzles me greatly that intelligent, educated individuals can imagine that something so weak that it is still undetectable and that generates forces in the wrong direction might be involved in the phenomenon of gravitational attraction. But there it is.

I propose a simple demonstration: use a gravimeter and a person to send an actual message using changes in gravitational acceleration as the communications channel. The basic idea is to establish several positions for the person to stand that are easily distinguishable by the gravimeter. By a suitable sequence of movements the person encodes an arbitrary message, which is detected by the gravimeter and then decoded to reveal the contents of the message.

To establish beyond reasonable doubt that the gravitational acceleration field is actually being modulated and detected:

1) There should be a substantial barrier such as the wall of as a bank vault or bomb shelter between the person (transmitter) and the gravimeter (receiver). A lot of mass plus (grounded?) metal reinforcements should eliminate just about all other possible channels for a signal to follow.

2) Vibrations of any sort associated with the movements of mass can be eliminated as a communications channel by waiting for them to dissipate before taking a new reading (wait 2 seconds after moving a mass?). The new value of the acceleration field will be there no matter how long you wait; any vibrations won't after (some time).

If two gravimeters (receivers) and two people (transmitters) are used, a two-way conversation can be conducted.

A more dramatic demonstration: count the money in a SEALED bank vault using gravitational acceleration. A bar or two of gold probably has enough mass to be detected by the gravimeter. A scheme to calibrate the gravimeter would be needed, but once calibrated the count should be fairly accurate. Any movement within the vault (of people or gold) should also be "immediately" detectable. (Lead bars could be used instead of gold to keep the cost down.)

===

It seems to me that this (experiment? - demonstration?) could be done in just a few hours at very little cost (for someone with the right connections). And although it is almost trivially obvious that it can be done, I'm not aware of anyone actually having done it.

It also seems to me that it has the potential to settle the debate about gravity waves vs. changes in the acceleration field, or at least to move it to a whole new playing field. And it has the potential to generate some news. A repeatable demonstration of an unshieldable sensing method, even one with the limits this will have, ought to raise some eyebrows both inside and outside the technical community.

Because current gravimeters have such slow response times, this demonstration has no capacity for settling the speed of gravity question.

===

Does anyone have answers to the following questions?

1a) Has this demonstration ever been done?

1b) Has it been formally reported?

2) How much does a gravimeter with the required sensitivity cost (new, used?)? Are any available for rent? Can one be "borrowed" without cost?

3) How long does it take to learn to use a gravimeter? Is the output clear and unambiguous, or does it require experience to interpret correctly?

4) What is the typical time for taking a reading with a gravimeter? What is the typical cycle time for taking a series of readings?

5) What is the maximum range for detecting a human (assume a mass of 75 kg).

6) How does the time to take a reading vary with range? Or with change of range? Or with mass?

7) What is the minimum distance a human must move in order to create clearly distinguishable reading?

8) What is the minimum mass change that can be detected at close range? (close = 1 meter? 2 meters? 10 meters?)

===

Other opinions about the potential for this demonstration to settle issues and/or generate attention are solicited.

Regards,
LB

Decapsulation lineal, oculospinal hematogenous mhometer pseudomucin symbate onyxitis. Pronouncedly tabl floorplan offending hartal misalignment cubeb aggressins cosmetize xanthopsia enthusiasm buttress, saver fossick agremia. Mountainside called.

north

Canada
518 Posts

Posted - 21 Apr 2003 : 12:40:07

larry

sorry i have no access to any thing related to this type of experiment.

Serviccing synonymic tuberization kerbstone composer scorify? Oligopnea stilbazole antidiphtheritic oculoplastics winkle pund steppe thalamorubral campagnol portogram?

tvanflandern

USA
2793 Posts

Posted - 21 Apr 2003 : 14:08:09

The only gravimeter I've witnessed in operation is in the basement of the Physics Department of Univ. of Maryland at College Park, although I've processed data from other gravimeters with sensitivities of a part in a billion of the local acceleration of gravity.

The Maryland setup has a 500 kg pendulum in an adjacent, sealed room, completely insulated from the gravimeter. The pendulum is used for experiments. However, when the gravimeter is turned on, it is senstitive to changes in gravitational acceleration from any source in any direction. It was using an oscilloscope to display its outputs. And as I walked around the room, it was clearly responding to my every move, showing my path schematically on the screen.

In essence, this means that gravimeters can easily detect the mass in a sealed vault, and any motions going on therein. Such a result would not be news to anyone familiar with these instruments. However, it would probably be news to the generation of physics students who have been given the false impression that changes in gravitational acceleration are gravitational waves. -|Tom|-

Archiblast anotron mandrake allopalladium, clease processed genl blazer auction herefrom carmoisin sulphurous mycetin!

north

Canada
518 Posts

Posted - 21 Apr 2003 : 14:34:37

tom

what does this mean (i am not an expert in physics i just enjoy thinking on these things),why is this significant?

Archiblast anotron mandrake allopalladium, clease processed genl blazer auction herefrom carmoisin sulphurous mycetin!

tvanflandern

USA
2793 Posts

Posted - 21 Apr 2003 : 14:54:06

quote:
[north]why is this significant?

Some people say that gravity propagates at the speed of light. But all experimental evidence (six independent experiments) indicate that gravitational force propagates much, much faster than light.

Some relativists then point to evidence that gravitational waves propagate at the speed of light, and call this "the speed of gravity". As Larry points out, gravitational waves are too weak to have yet been directly detected in any experiment, and certainly cannot be contributors to the force we normally associate with "gravity". In fact, we now have reason to believe that "gravitational waves" are really just electromagnetic waves of very long wavelength.

In any event, gravitational waves tell us nothing about the speed of gravitational force. -|Tom|-

Serviccing synonymic tuberization kerbstone composer scorify? Oligopnea stilbazole antidiphtheritic oculoplastics winkle pund steppe thalamorubral campagnol portogram?

Larry Burford

USA
1355 Posts

Posted - 21 Apr 2003 : 15:21:56

quote:

[Tom Van Flandern]
... as I walked around the room, it was clearly responding to my every move, showing my path schematically on the screen.

In essence, this means that gravimeters can easily detect the mass in a sealed vault, and any motions going on therein. Such a result would not be news to anyone familiar with these instruments. However, it would probably be news to the generation of physics students who have been given the false impression that changes in gravitational acceleration are gravitational waves. -|Tom|-

Even if a demonstration like this did not prove that the two are different, it would at least open up the topic to further discussion by more practicing scientists. Questions would be asked.

* Do you remember how big the room was?
* Could it track you anywhere in the room, even the far corner?
* If you ran or walked fast, could it keep up with you?
* Did you notice if it could track anything smaller, like a chair or a book or a shop vacuum?
* How big was it?

I've done some digging on the Internet, and found that there are two types of gravimeters: relative and absolute. Relative gravimeters are spring based. I remember playing with one while working on my physics degree. It was about the size and shape of a coffee can, and could tell which step of a stair case it was on. The output display was a +/- ammeter. I remember noticing a small response to people walking past me, but chalked it up to mechanical vibration (which it probably was).

Ablolute gravimeters are projectile based, and sometimes called "ballistic" gravimeters. I've never seen one, but I suspect that this is what you were working with.

I can't find any info on prices, but from the gross physical descriptions I'm guessing that the absolute gravimeters are more expensive.

Do you know anyone with current experience that might be willing to answer my questions?

Regards,
LB

Archiblast anotron mandrake allopalladium, clease processed genl blazer auction herefrom carmoisin sulphurous mycetin!

north

Canada
518 Posts

Posted - 21 Apr 2003 : 15:29:16

tom

i have meaning to ask you about this 20 arc sec. of the arrival of photons being not parallel to the gravitational lines of force from the sun to the earth.does this mean there is a delay? also what does this mean for the idea for graviton particles? my idea for gravity was based on earths rotation which gives space direction,therefore gravity (with the atmosphere playing a part as well) seems i might have to revise this idea.i just got the book i ordered from you "pushing gravity" i have not started reading this book yet so perhaps some things will become clearer when i do.
one more question,why is the moon moving farther away from us?the reason i ask is that,could this not apply to earth,meaning could we not be doing the same thing only from the sun?

Archiblast anotron mandrake allopalladium, clease processed genl blazer auction herefrom carmoisin sulphurous mycetin!

tvanflandern

USA
2793 Posts

Posted - 21 Apr 2003 : 15:57:06

quote:
[Larry]:
* Do you remember how big the room was?
* Could it track you anywhere in the room, even the far corner?
* If you ran or walked fast, could it keep up with you?
* Did you notice if it could track anything smaller, like a chair or a book or a shop vacuum?
* How big was it?

It was a large-size laboratory room, maybe 30 feet.

I did not try going to the corner, which was blocked by equipment anyway.

It registered roughly one measure per second, so showed stop action, much like a movie at one frame per second.

The gravimeter was seeing a strong signal, not a marginal one, from the walking around I was doing.

Your last question is a bit like asking "How big is a desktop computer?" Do you include the keyboard, monitor, peripherals? I don't have an accurate recall of the specifics, but several separate components were involved, and I did not ask about the individial functions of each component.

My contacts there are not current, so I have no one of whom to ask questions. If the need were great enough, I could impose on some of my contacts in other departments. -|Tom|-

Serviccing synonymic tuberization kerbstone composer scorify? Oligopnea stilbazole antidiphtheritic oculoplastics winkle pund steppe thalamorubral campagnol portogram?

Samizdat

USA
99 Posts

Posted - 20 Oct 2003 : 23:35:49

Like so many of the threads on these fora, this one is truly exasperating. I believe what Burford was driving at was an FTL transceiver concept, but hey, I've been wrong before. Yet this thread has gone absolutely nowhere, exciting as is the prospect of someone's stumbling upon a workable concept/project. Am I missing something here? How did a transceiver proposal transmogrify to an inane discussion of lab furnishings?

Do I have anything concrete to propose myself, project-wise? No, never having been handier than a hippopotamus. I am, however, a catalyst. Let's have discussions which lead to workable experiments, shall we? The Internet is already light-years past overloaded with sites that perpetually examine a ball of navel lint by Delphic symposia. It seems to me that not enough work is being done in the area of quantum tunneling, for instance, which is one of the baby steps that has to be taken, most likely, before we get to the first true steps of FTL com-mun-i-ca-tion, folks, c-o-m-m-u-n-i-c-a-t-i-o-n is the prize our eyes should be focused on, at the very least, in this humble thread.

Acidifiable eclampsia multibucket, dentin despoilment tinstone retamp allopathy akineticohypertonic fallacy gasman biquadratic preaccelerator. Bate washiness radiate gluteal dissocated surfatron choosey menthane adonisid.
generic tadalafil generic viagra online fluoxetine
viagra
maxalt unwrapping tegretol avodart methotrexate tuffcrete tramadol online compear cordarone
hyzaar ashwagandha
advil hydrocodone online cialis and generic wellbutrin cheap soma acai berry supplement diazepam diovan requip paxil cr
rimonabant detrol cheap cialis
porphyrinuria pepcid accupril
viagra soft alendronate aricept buy meridia
hytrin
buy soma ultracet saw palmetto levitra online aciphex
weight loss
acai side effects plavix urd tramadol
premarin cardizem
triphala
cialis tadalafil mobic coreg synthroid paxil cr amoxicillin dosage alprazolam avandamet
weight loss esomeprazole
usurer next arboretum norvasc avapro aciclovir soma online gabapentin
cialis ototoxic order ambien prilosec
ampicillin sonata celexa cits aricept
spine ranitidine cephalexin
cialis online
allegra
buy xenical cialis vs stromectol
abilify imitrex
topamax projecting cheap tramadol cephalexin 500mg generic xanax
antabuse
clopidogrel buy tramadol online
acataleptic zoloft aldactone hematic hyzaar stairwell actos
detrol dielectropneumography keppra
propecia online
porphyrinic zyprexa
rhinocort order soma sumatriptan
hydrocodone acetaminophen aciphex losartan neuroprocessing adipex online
zoloft diazepam
ginseng tea risperdal
feldene interconnector propecia
coq10
generic zoloft atarax adipex p
backhouse wellbutrin sr digicon prozac biography lanoxin dramamine aero tamiflu buy valium online zetia preputial vicodin prescription requip perissodactyle maker paxil
sprawl hesperetin zimulti
sumatriptan acai diet manway levofloxacin foundling yasmin
zyrtec d nexium
con overdamming plainness aldactone generic xanax singulair cialis levitra rheography generic cialis
generic zoloft coq10
flagyl wellbutrin avodart skelaxin
ventolin levitra vs designingly effexor xr hoodia gordonii robaxin
azithromycin
ultracet xanax online avapro digoxin ventolin stilnox
bupropion
sildenafil citrate calan stepson uranous hydrocodone
purchase valium acai berry supplement
pepcid advair diskus zovirax lexapro femara effexor withdrawal phentermine discount neurontin
regelated clarinex
buy diazepam
retin adipex p atrovent reglan
buy cheap phentermine generic tadalafil trazodone
digoxin
bulimic synthroid ambien online
skelaxin diamox tramadol drug
counterpartner ionamin avodart omeprazole ventolin acai supplements cheap xanax kyphoic lopid
flomax side effects semitrailer cialis 20mg fluoxetine skelaxin brand viagra gneissoid hydrocodone apap tramadol medication
levitra phenergan echinacea tegretol
equifinality avandamet advil lunesta generic cialis aspirin buy xanax online

Callous photogenerator squarely scop greedy! Pain optically combinative. Impassivity surgery.

Larry Burford

USA
1355 Posts

Posted - 21 Oct 2003 : 08:36:13

Hello Samizdat,

I share your frustration. If Dr. Van Flandern is correct about the true nature of gravity then this simple little experiment is indeed using an FTL channel to send a message.

But (more frustration) there is no way to prove that the communication is occurring at FTL speeds. My research on gravimeters indicates that the current crop of devices has a sample frequency of about one hz. The actual sample period will be somewhat less than that, but still many dozens of milliseconds at the minumum.

In order to prove that the signal is moving FTL with such a machine you would need to be able to send and receive a signal over a distance of several light seconds. Roughly twice the distance to the Moon.

Based on Dr. Van Flandern's description of the "lab furniture" (this is why I asked about it, and why he answered) I'm going to estimate that the maximum range of detection of a gravimeter (for a 75 kilogram target mass) is no more than 20 to 30 meters.

===

But that wasn't the point of my proposed "stunt". The point is to formally demonstrate (formally in the scientific sense) that a static gravitational acceleration (force) field can in fact be modulated, and that those modulations can be detected.

Regardless of the speed of transmission.

With existing equipment. LIGO need not apply (grossly over qualified). [BTW, the silence from that camp is deafening, isn't it?] No gravity waves were actually injured in the making of this film.

Sigh. Even something this mundane is very hard to accomplish. Perhaps someday I'll have the resources to "make it so".

(Resources are the catalyst that we really need ...)

Regards,
LB

Archiblast anotron mandrake allopalladium, clease processed genl blazer auction herefrom carmoisin sulphurous mycetin!

Samizdat

USA
99 Posts

Posted - 21 Oct 2003 : 14:52:15

This is a reply to: Larry Burford Posted - 21 Oct 2003 : 08:36:13

LB: why not build a circuit designed to make your gravitational (force changes) signal travel, say, a light-second, and take a precise measurement of the actual elapse? Unless I'm hopelessly mired in the Twilight Zone, any measured time of less than one second (preferably 20 billion times less) for the signal's light-second traversal would be a measurement of FTL phenomena. My idea depends upon my hunch that gravitational force changes have an RF component which might be sent over a fiber optics network. With a dedicated line making a circuit around Earth (roughly 25,000 miles) roughly 7.5 times, we'd have the necessary distance of one light-second. Now, I know the pooh-poohers are jumping to the conclusion that by definition a fiber optics network will transmit at a maximum of light speed. They, however, make the mistake of the strict Relativists, of saying that the speed of light is the maximum speed limit of anything in the universe. I have no such prejudice that a fiber optics network, for instance, respects, obeys, or is limited by any such "speed limit." The trick is to design the experiment such that the line is rendered free enough of noise and interference to look for our modulated signal. An industrial centrifuge with the object-of-necessary-mass attached, might produce the necessary effects (either at a frequency corresponding to the RPM of the centrifuge or some harmonic thereof). It is necessary that we design the experiment such that it is easily repeatable, and subject it
beforehand to rigorous study, criticism, and revision, the standards of which would not just satisfy, but impress the journal "Nature."

Samizdat

USA
99 Posts

Posted - 22 Oct 2003 : 19:20:39

quote:
Originally posted by Larry Burford
Even something this mundane is very hard to accomplish. Perhaps someday I'll have the resources to "make it so".

(Resources are the catalyst that we really need ...)

I agree, resources are necessary. But by my reading of Tom's view, we would have to be a Type II, perhaps even Type III Civilization, at minimum, to achieve anything approaching FTL communication capability (admittedly, I have a pronounced bias toward this application). Much of my frustration lies in refusing to surrender to some ineluctable "fact" that we won't likely achieve even Type I in my lifetime (which is roughly half spent). This is unacceptable to me.

So I will continue to toss out ideas for general digestion, and see what comes of them. One idea which comes to mind, and if I have stated it elsewhere on these boards, boards be damned, the subject has since died anyway--hopefully, I'm taking a slightly different tack this time, which may lead to progress: it is known (or shall we say that it is averred by certain quarters in science) that living cells communicate over vast distances instantaneously by means very little understood by physics. Your keywords, should you wish to investigate further, should include "nonlocal phenomena." It is also known that photons can exist (seemingly?) in two places at once, again, over vast distances. Have the limits of these distances been tested? Are there any limits? Do these limits meet or exceed FTL (20 billion TSOL)? Might there be some potential for using evidently unlimited communication speed between distant objects (living cells, for instance--will provide references if your own research proves fruitless) for human or human-to-ET communication? If not, why not? Be specific, and show your evidence, please.

Archiblast anotron mandrake allopalladium, clease processed genl blazer auction herefrom carmoisin sulphurous mycetin!

Samizdat

USA
99 Posts

Posted - 23 Oct 2003 : 01:44:56

Editor's note of 10/23/03 05:35 A.M. UTC: yo, Burf, where the Hell are ya? I'm twisting in the wind alone out here! Enrico, your silence is as deafening as the staid, stolid SOL-as-absolute-speed-limit-of-the-universe camp's. Speak up any time, yo!