Hi querious
querious wrote:
Why does a charged foil not react to Wal's dipole field?
It seems the party is almost over, with no one wanting to play your game?
It reminds me a bit of the child in the supermarket, stomping feet, screaming with flushed face, "but MUM I want a ...Lolly"
Anyway you have got me very queerious indeed about your experiment.
I wonder if you could advise.
1. What type of charge you put on your foil? Was it positive or negative?
2. Did you somehow only put charge on one side of the foil????, or opposites on each side, please describe?
3. I see you have criticised Brengt for lacking of technical substance, so I wondering in your experimental proof how you calculated the aggregate of the approx 6400 km of Wals dipoles from your lab to the centre of the Earth in order to arrive at a testable quantity of charge on your foil? What was sufficient discernable charge to effect a result? Your math of the amount of charge you applied would be most interesting!
4. What was the variance if any obtained from your foil? Did it fall at 9.8m/sec^2 and or what is the exact gravity reading at your lab? What rate of acceleration was recorded?
5. How did you eliminate the efects of the atmosphere ? Did you conduct this experiment in a vacuum to eliminate air resistance?
6. Did you perform the experiment both above the Earth surface and below (perhaps in some form of vacuum chamber)? You know there is a considerable atmospheric electric gradient from Earth (ground) upwards how did you eliminate that effect? That lightening stuff isn't falling rapidly to Earth by gravity..... you know already!!!
7. What effect predictions were you expecting to see in your experiment? Did you think the foil was going to shoot off at acceleration, reach escape velocity and head out into space?
As I say very queerious about all this.
Also I note your dedication to Mr Einsteins GR & SR. Do you not see the neo Einsteiners bowling ball on the bed sheet description of their " gravity", weight of planet curving the "space time fabic" just a bit circular in logic too ...DONT YOU THINK?
Thanks in advance.
Cheers