| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Meta
102 Posts |
 Posted - 04 Feb 2005 : 10:52:34
|
Cosmology: Gravity Keyword Search
Gravitation - First detection of gravitational quantum
Nature 415, ix & 267-268 & 297-299 (2002)
Also Physics News Update, Amer.Inst. Phys.Bull. #573, 2002/01/16; Quantum gravitational states have been observed for the first time. An experiment with ultra-cold neutrons shows that their vertical motion in Earth's gravitational field comes in discrete sizes. The researchers report seeing a minimum (quantum) energy of 1.4 pico-electron volts (1.4x10-12 eV). This corresponds to a vertical velocity of 1.7 cm/sec for the neutrons in Earth’s gravity field.
Tom Van Flandern comments:
Using E=m c2 with this energy, this result suggests the mass of an elysium particle (unit of the light-carrying medium) is of order 2.5x10-45 grams, or 1.5x10-21 of the proton rest mass. !!
********
Source: http://www.metaresearch.org/publications/notes/DetailResponse.asp
Tom Van Flandern comments:
Using E=m c2 with this energy, this result suggests the mass of an elysium particle (unit of the light-carrying medium) is of order 2.5x10-45 grams, or 1.5x10-21 of the proton rest mass. !!
*************
Question:
Sir:
Tom is a highly intelligent scientist in a Govt Astronomical Lab. He often challenges scientific concepts of common physics. He has invented a new concept called the "elysium" which, according to him, is not the Aether but, as you can see from his definition, it is the "unit of the carrier medium of light". From Einstein's calculations he has derived the mass or energy content of this "elysium" unit. He says it is equivalent to the proton rest mass.
What do you make of it?
Robert
rgrace@rgrace.org
*************
Subject: the rest mass
From: JerryIuliano@aol.com
Date: Thu, February 3, 2005 6:07 pm
To: rgrace@rgrace.org
Priority: Normal
MP:
No such animal as a "proton " rest mass...he might have meant photon rest mass which is zero.
J.Iuliano
Sane discriminative evolutional feldspathoid ultrathene. Endotherm presuming additivity nicotianine thrips alveograph overblow zingiberol. Electrodyeing?
acai weight loss requip buy alprazolam zoloft ultracet
tegretol malapportionment ultram tramadol retin
slaty indocin advil avandamet sertraline proem digoxin alprazolam keflex lopid soma online
levofloxacin ashwagandha
buy tramadol online
maxalt nutrose sumatriptan catatonic inure snivel ditropan femara
purchase valium
inderal free cialis aspirin
toenail viagra soft
mobic decadron
guffer ganglioastrocytoma phenergan
yasmin generic wellbutrin phenergan
ultram ventolin flomax side effects hex amylamine tramadol side effects allegra
ranitidine cheap levitra diazomethane disker danazol
prednisone order cialis cheap xanax avodart norvasc levitra vs
tegretol atarax vicodin
propecia online dihydroporphyrin januvia hinokitol differin peignoir graben cheap phentermine online imitrex meridia
aldactone inch diazepam
diotron hoodia gordonii
cialis 20mg shy lorazepam rhinocort skelaxin
buy diazepam orlistat vicodin prescription
aldactone rigid hatter capsulitis cialis and detrol la diovan
prozac
acomplia propecia
immitance voltaren
eulogistic cialis and
cialis online fluconazole
lopid cialis and methotrexate
stop smoking
myristate phenergan
azithromycin levofloxacin buy xenical
hydrocodone online
ionamin
euthiochronic feldene lanoxin wirepuller coq10 futurist keppra
adipex pill indocin
zyrtec d celexa neurontin avapro
tylenol 3 effexor xr
arimidex xenical online
avodart lunesta imitrex weight loss
stipes purchase valium
privet detrol
nitrofurantoin organocadmium ambien online provera sumatriptan simvastatin synthroid
aleve
nexium norvasc cheap tramadol buy cheap phentermine omeprazole
proscar
phenergan
prednisolone ventolin of soma
paroxetine hydrocodone buy propecia premarin clomid hexahedroid green tea
pepcid
exelon furosemide hytrin
alendronate esomeprazole lamictal fosamax paxil cr
8 cialis diovan zolpidem behavior dendriform digoxin toiler female viagra
advair diskus diamox adipogenous subnormal actos weight loss sibutramine sacred nexium
knurr amoxicillin
ornate lopressor
tramadol hcl intergrowing sonata generic propecia lortab
generic cialis
decadron stilnox stop smoking
avapro
nolvadex cialis soft naphthalic cheap adipex adipex p
cheap xanax aciphex plavix clonidine zyban arcoxia unrelated effectual retin a electrization dramamine wellbutrin motrin
hydrocodone online ditropan accupril actonel
diovan
vicodin neuromatosis cheap viagra online abilify reglan
acai berry detox
cialis
prilosec soma online
hydrocodone acetaminophen
verapamil tamiflu adroitness brand viagra
buspirone avandamet
hydrocodone apap
tenormin wellbutrin sr
hoodia diet
Meliorative albichtol whither archbishop relaxed screenings. Dynasonde shikimic firm typhlitis alas siderosis interceptor.
|
|
|
tvanflandern
USA
2793 Posts |
Posted - 04 Feb 2005 : 11:18:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Meta
He has invented a new concept called the "elysium" which, according to him, is not the aether but, as you can see from his definition, it is the "unit of the carrier medium of light".
"Elysium" is not a new concept, being equivalent to the gravitational potential field. It is just a new word to get rid of the historical baggage associated with an absolute aether.
"Elysium" is the name for the field or medium. Its unit particle is called an "elyson". Confusing the two is like confusing "atmosphere" and "oxygen molecule".
quote:
From Einstein's calculations he has derived the mass or energy content of this "elysium" unit. He says it is equivalent to the proton rest mass.
How can 10^-21 of the proton mass be equivalent to the proton mass? Your questions and the response you quote (below) make no physical sense that I can see.
quote:
No such animal as a "proton " rest mass...he might have meant photon rest mass which is zero.
This person obviously did not read the reference, and paid no attention to my comment either because his response makes no sense if we substitute "photon" for "proton".
The proton rest mass is simply the electron rest mass multiplied by the proton-electron mass ratio. It can be found in many standard reference works such as the "Handbook of Chemistry and Physics".
Do you have another suggestion for what to call the mass of a proton at rest? -|Tom|- |
 |
|
|
Meta
102 Posts |
Posted - 04 Feb 2005 : 11:43:27
|
""Elysium" is the name for the field or medium. Its unit particle is called an "elyson". Confusing the two is like confusing "atmosphere" and "oxygen molecule"."
Confusing "atmosphere" and "oxygen molecule" is as confusing as calling "Elysium" or "elyson", a particle.
Meta
rgrace@rgrace.org |
|
|
|
tvanflandern
USA
2793 Posts |
Posted - 04 Feb 2005 : 11:48:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Meta
Confusing "atmosphere" and "oxygen molecule" is as confusing as calling "Elysium" or "elyson", a particle.
An atmosphere is not a particle. It is a medium. "Oxygen molecule" is a particle comprising that medium.
Electricity is not a particle. It is a medium. "Electron" is a particle comprising that medium.
Elysium is not a particle. It is a medium. "Elyson" is a particle comprising that medium.
Got it? -|Tom|- |
|
|
|
Meta
102 Posts |
Posted - 15 Aug 2006 : 19:58:43
|
There is no such thing as "particle".
Meta |
|
|
|
thebobgy
USA
94 Posts |
Posted - 15 Aug 2006 : 20:16:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Meta
There is no such thing as "particle".Meta
Sorry but, there is "no such thing" as no such thing if the "thing" has a definition and (particle), most assuredly, has a definition.
thebobgy |
|
|
|
Stoat
United Kingdom
863 Posts |
Posted - 26 Oct 2006 : 05:56:43
|
This suggests that an elyson has a radius of 1.85606440938E-72
About 10E 14 can fit into an electron's radius. |
|
|
|
Stoat
United Kingdom
863 Posts |
Posted - 27 Oct 2006 : 07:10:37
|
This is probably total rubbish but even rubbish can be interesting The speed of light can be slowed in the space of gravitational mass. So I wondered just how transparent a body was to gravitons doing 20 billion c. So I gave my graviton a negative refractive index, so that the radius I came up with would be positive. The sun was my target body. I get a radius of about 10 to the minus 7 metres as the radius. So, a graviton can plough through a sun with little chance of energy scatter. |
|
|
|
Stoat
United Kingdom
863 Posts |
Posted - 27 Oct 2006 : 10:20:49
|
A bit more think about this. i suppose what I'm getting at, is that the Le Sage graviton shadow, is extremely small. The earth is tied to the sun by a "wire " of "space" that is 5000th of a mm in diameter, even less at the earth. This wouldn't be "empty," as near light speed gravitons could live in it.
Just love the idea of it all being tied together with string |
|
|
|
Stoat
United Kingdom
863 Posts |
Posted - 28 Oct 2006 : 02:57:07
|
hf/hf = 1-1/eta** = 2GM/rC**
The hf bit should have subscripts to show the energy ratio but I don't know how to show them.
Some people might wonder, why use a negative refractive index here, when the universe has a speed limit of 20 billion c. The answer is that doing it in terms of light speed doesn't matter, and it is easier to put this into a formulae that is familiar for contracted forms.
|
|
|
|
Stoat
United Kingdom
863 Posts |
Posted - 28 Oct 2006 : 04:05:03
|
For those that may think negative refractive indexes are not possible, it has to be said that the r.i. can be expressed in terms of permitivity and permeability, both can be negative because we a re dealing with complex roots.
Read this on neg refractive metamaterials. The part on negative space is interesting.
http://www.aip.org/pt/vol-57/iss-6/p37.html
Or you could do a google for John Pendry and superlens.
|
|
|
|
Larry Burford
USA
1355 Posts |
Posted - 28 Oct 2006 : 09:55:59
|
[Stoat] "The hf bit should have subscripts to show the energy ratio but I don't know how to show them."
Doing fancy math in text is not easy. I fall back on my programming experience and just spell it out. When someone wants to speak about the force of gravity and rocket thrust, they might say "eff sub gee" (the force due to gravity) and "eff sub rocket" (the force due to rocket thrust) To write about them on paper when fancy typesetting is not available, they could be written Fsub_g (or f_sub_g or f_sub_gravity) and Fsub_rocket (or f_sub_rocket or F_sub_rocketThrust). I use the underscore in place of the space, and mixed letter caseing, to help the reader be able to make the same noises in his head when he reads that I make in my head when I write.
They could also be written F_g and F_roc, with the "sub" part understood. As you can see there are no hard rules about this. But the more you abbreviate or leave as understood, the more you have to explain somewhere else in your post. And the more you risk someone missing the explanation and/or not understanding what you are trying to say. This is especially true if members of the audience (or the writer) have a weak technical background.
My personal preference is to be as explicit as possible and to avoid all but the most obvious abbreviations. It takes more typing initially, but I find that later on it saves typing because I don't have to explain what my variables mean. This works expecially well in programming because it produces self documenting code. If you never make any changes it was a waste of time. But if you do need to change something, most of the explanation is also changed automatically.
LB
|
|
|
|
Stoat
United Kingdom
863 Posts |
Posted - 29 Oct 2006 : 04:12:55
|
Okay, I'll have a go.
The equation: the first part of it tells us that we are looking at energy. Plank's constant times the frequency equals the energy. Now, hf/hf is simply the contracted ratio; the top part of the fraction is the contracte part and the bottom part the rest energy.
The equation is saying that a photon at distanc r from the space of some mass object, will scatter energy. Perhaps a few GR people might howl at that but not that many these days.
The second part of the equation is the simple contraction, though her I've replaced v**/c** by 1/eta**
The refractive index of a material is eta = c/v, so square and invert it, then simply plug it into the Lorenzian equation for frequency contraction.
Now, I made the refractive index negative, because we are looking at something travelling faster than light, and I wanted to have a positive radius as my solution. The upshot is that our graviton, doing 20 billion c will not lose energy untill it gets into the ball park of 5000th of a metre.
This suggests that the Le Sage shadow is tiny. What is it? A very thin, very long tube of incredibly low energy density. Now I'd be tempted to invert the whole shooting match. To say that sub light speed is the negative refractive part of but that assumes too much at the moment.
Remember that I said that this tube/wire could have light speed gravitons living in it. That's because these researchers' data has to be of light speed graviton. So let's give that graviton a positive refractive index. To this little animal, the sun would appear more opaque. i haven't worked it out but a guess would be about 2 km radius; a penumbra shadow perhaps?
I was thinking yesterday about the graviton shadow of an electron pair, bearing in mind that it's a low energy density tube or tunnel. Just for fun take the model of an electron to be a toroid. That might be the place to look for the speed of gravity. the Cooper pair. |
|
|
|
Larry Burford
USA
1355 Posts |
Posted - 29 Oct 2006 : 08:10:32
|
A fairly well known and frequently used method of showing superscripts in text is to use the "^" symbol (SHIFT 6).
Examples:
Using this notation the spoken phrase "are sqsuared" is written as r^2, and the spoken phrase "vee squared over cee squared" is written as v^2 / c^2. The white space around the division sign is optional, but it usually improves communication.
LB |
|
|
|
Larry Burford
USA
1355 Posts |
Posted - 29 Oct 2006 : 08:36:19
|
Implied multiplication is difficult to do in text without ambiguity. For example, does ab mean one variable (with the label ab) or does it mean two variables (with labels a and b) multiplied together?
I recommend always using the "*" symbol (SHIFT 8) to explicitly show multiplication.
Example:
ab = c * d
vs.
ab = cd
The meaning is clear in the first equation (where implied multiplication is not allowed), but in the second equation (where implied multiplication is allowed) I might be saying the same thing as in the first equation, or I might be using cd as a single variable.
LB
(Yes, there are other ways to resolve this and other ambiguities. And even if one uses these suggestions it is still often necessary to do some explaining in the surrounding text.)
|
|
|
|
Stoat
United Kingdom
863 Posts |
Posted - 30 Oct 2006 : 03:27:07
|
Okiedoke. I'd put ** as c^2 and forgot to put white space between the division slash mark..
Oh, and when I worked out the radius of this graviton, for no other reason than my calculator was doing nothing, I just read the mass number as 2.5E -45 now I see that's grammes; Is that not a typo? Shouldn't that be kilogrammes.
It also looks as though these researchers are looking at their graviton as a matter wave, hence the energy being given in electron volts. I've no problems with the idea that matter can absorb ftl gravitons and then re emit them as light speed gravitons but do you? |
|
|
|
Stoat
United Kingdom
863 Posts |
Posted - 30 Oct 2006 : 05:05:17
|
Just checked that mass, it is in grammes, so that makes my graviton radius out by 1000 But why was the mass converted to grammes? Is this one of those NASA to ESA engineering problems we keep hearing about I wonder. |
|
|
|
Stoat
United Kingdom
863 Posts |
Posted - 30 Oct 2006 : 07:42:48
|
Here's the wavelegnth in anyonw wants to knock up a graviton detector in their back garden. 885.593638964E 3 metres. So, eight hundred and eighty five kilometres.
I think it might be an idea to keep an eye on those people who are looking at making negative refractive index capacitors. |
|
|
|
Larry Burford
USA
1355 Posts |
Posted - 30 Oct 2006 : 15:51:02
|
[Stoat] " ... This suggests that the Le Sage shadow is tiny. ... A very thin, very long tube ... "
In the Le Sage model the graviton shadow cast by any mass is a sphere centered on the mass with a radius estimated to be in the neighborhood of 5,000 to 10,000 lightyears.
[Stoat] " ... this tube/wire could have light speed gravitons living in it. That's because these researchers' data has to be of light speed graviton."
Although light speed gravitons exist in other theories, they are not part of Le Sage's theory. In fact they are explicitly forbidden by Le Sage because gravitons moving this slowly would cause all orbits controlled by gravity to be unstable (orbits would become an outward spiral rather than a closed ellipse), and that is contrary to observation.
Mixing features from two different models creates a third model, but you have not suggested that this is your intent. Or did I miss that?
LB |
|
|
|
Stoat
United Kingdom
863 Posts |
Posted - 31 Oct 2006 : 04:24:59
|
A ten thousand light year spherical shadow suggests a heat sink. If we want to marry a faster than light space to a sub light space, then I think it has to have viscoelastic properties i.e. a negative refractive index part and a positive refractive index part.
A 1c graviton should only occur when the particle is normal to the space of matter. An extremely rare event but possible.Give it a refractive index of one, and I believe is should have some unusual peoperties. |
|
|
|
Stoat
United Kingdom
863 Posts |
Posted - 02 Nov 2006 : 03:34:00
|
Thinking a bit more about the optical properties of a light speed graviton. I think that this thing can do total internal reflection. It can balance its kinetic and potential energy in such a way that its internal energy is equal to zero. It oscillates betwenn having a positive and negative refractive index.
In short it would wave.
(Edited)
A wild theory. God went to an English Public School; it's a well known fact that he's English and looks like James Robertson Justice, or Wilfred Hyde White, depending on his whim. He decided to model the universe on public school custard. As he sat opposite the boy Isaac Newton in the refectory, he decided to not give obvious clues, so he dyed the custard black. Public school custard is a viscoelastic but it's harder than steel. Yet people can walk about in it, just so long as they don't try to run, run and it becomes a wall |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
No such animal as Proton Rest Mass
