Action at a Distance = Fiction

[Lloyd]

"Attraction"

If one wants to measure the "speed of gravity" one needs a short pulse of it.

Surely, gravity is a push from outside, not a pull from inside. Same applies to other forces of "attraction". How would anything be able to pull, even if it was made of string or whatever? The particles in strings etc are pushed together from outside too, not "attracted" together.

Or are we going to suppose that "attraction" is the force of Love? One particle loves another one, so it moves toward it? If the feeling is mutual, then both move toward each other? If the second one dislikes the first one, then it moves away while the first one keeps trying to move together? I don't think such attraction/repulsion motions have been detected in the microcosm. Anyway, how can attraction actually exist in physics? It seems to me to be an utter absurdity.

Repulsion makes sense, because impenetrability would prevent two particles (that are more or less randomly moving toward each other) from going right through each other, but would instead bounce apart. But attraction would seem to rely on a magical property of matter or particles. Repulsion would be the same as momentum, I think. Mathis' ideas about spinning particles absorbing smaller particles polarly via external pressure and shooting them out equatorially via centrifugal force makes the most sense to me to explain repulsion, I mean besides collisions also explaining it. What's more explanatory than that?

[seasmith]

I think Mathis is great, and follow his work fairly regularly, but unfortunately a 'repulsion only' paradigm doesn't explain
chemical bonding, light-matter coupling or even plain vanilla adsorption.
As Feynman famously purloined, "likes like likes", doesn't necessarily mandate 'attraction' either.
There are degrees of resonance apparent in the physical realm, and they can be portrayed in electrical terms.

oops, game starting, mastarde

[sjw40364]

Attraction is nothing more than torque from the angular momentum supplied by the magnetic fields and current, wether galactic, solar or atomic scale.
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=43AeuDvW ... 3AeuDvWc0k
Orbits offset this angular torque with acceleration, something that can never be duplicated while in the gravity well (EMF) influence of another body as all objects are part of that body and cannot individually possess more charge than what can be shared by the surroundings, discounting explosive releases. Hence a hammer "falls", is "pushed" the same as a feather. But in space it is undeniable the hammer could never orbit the feather. Mistake one to believe the shuttle (or any object including hammer and feather) is separate from the earth until it actually reaches an orbit that allows it to escape. Until then the EMF field of the earth doesn't differentiate between your atoms and those of the rocks under your feet. Or the atoms of the hammer and feather.

[Goldminer]

Threatening (to discover) quantum gravity with a big metal bar



The AURIGA gravitational wave detector consists of a 3-meter aluminum cylinder, cooled to a few thousandths of a degree above absolute zero. The bar is kept carefully isolated from other vibrations, to help measure tiny gravitational disturbances - or possibly quantum-gravitational effects.

Scientific Method / Science & Exploration
Threatening (to discover) quantum gravity with a big metal bar
Vibrations of AURIGA detector set limits on deviations from quantum mechanics.

by Matthew Francis - Dec 18 2012, 5:00am PST

Physical Sciences

71
The AURIGA gravitational wave detector consists of a 3-meter aluminum cylinder, cooled to a few thousandths of a degree above absolute zero. The bar is kept carefully isolated from other vibrations, to help measure tiny gravitational disturbances - or possibly quantum-gravitational effects.
AURIGA/INFN

Despite many decades of effort, quantum physics and gravitation remain separate: no consistent quantum theory of gravity exists. However, that doesn't mean we don't have hints about what such a theory would look like. In particular, many proposals that are wildly different in their details agree that there is a fundamental length scale—the Planck length—at which the force of gravity becomes as strong as the other forces. Close to the Planck scale, ordinary physics, including the famous Heisenberg uncertainty principle, breaks down. Exactly how this breakdown happens is presently (wait for it!) uncertain.

When theory is silent, experiment must step in. A new paper analyzed results from the AURIGA gravitational wave experiment to check for deviations from standard quantum mechanics in the vibrations of a massive metal bar at cryogenic temperatures. The AURIGA results showed no deviation from standard quantum physics, yielding an upper bound on the energy of quantum gravity modifications. The experimenters concluded that the theorists needed to get back to work so that the experimenters have a better idea of what to expect.

So far, experimenters and theorists haven't had much to talk about. This is in part because the Planck length is extremely tiny: 1.6×10-35 meters, compared with the 10-15 meter or so occupied by an atomic nucleus. The particle physics approach to probing short distances is to crank up the energy of collisions, but these energies are well beyond the capabilities of any collider—including the Large Hadron Collider (LHC).

As a result, researchers have turned to other methods to search for quantum-gravitational effects. One such technique involves observing extremely high energy astrophysical events, though these carry their own measurement problems. In the laboratory, the focus has been on collective behavior in very cold systems. (For one such proposal, see my earlier Ars Technica article.)

AURIGA is the Antenna Ultracriogenica Risonante per l'Indagine Gravitazionale Astronomica, or "ultra-cryogenic resonant antenna for gravitational-wave astronomy." The detector consists of an aluminum cylinder 3 meters in length and weighing approximately 2.3 tons. The whole apparatus is cooled to a few thousandths of a degree above absolute zero to minimize the effect of thermal vibrations of its atoms. When a gravitational wave from a cataclysmic astronomical event reaches the detector, the aluminum bar should vibrate at its resonant frequency, like a wine glass when a certain musical note is played.

(To date, no gravitational waves have been detected directly, either by AURIGA or the larger laser-based detectors such as LIGO.)

Although this is not its primary purpose, AURIGA's ultra-cryogenic operation temperature made it a good candidate for searching for quantum-gravitational effects. According to quantum physics, mechanical systems will vibrate even at absolute zero, exhibiting something known as zero-point energy. If the Heisenberg uncertainty principle is modified by quantum gravity, then the zero-point energy would also be changed—and it's possible we could measure its increase.

The present analysis found an upper limit for quantum-gravitational effects in the AURIGA data by determining the vibrational energy of the aluminum bar. This is accomplished by coupling the bar to sensitive electrical readout instruments, which were designed for the detection of gravitational waves.

The limit the researchers found was not very stringent: there's still a lot of room for deviation from quantum mechanics at the resolution provided by this experiment. The lack of stringency in these limits leaves open the question of whether AURIGA is sensitive enough to measure quantum gravitational effects. However, these results are a proof of principle, since this stands as the first use of a very macroscopic body to probe physics at the smallest physical scales.

As the researchers emphasized, theory needs to catch up now. While some quantum gravity schemes make specific predictions for deviations from the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, they are often based on idealized systems or single-particle measurements. Promising techniques, including the AURIGA experiment, harness collective phenomena: the behavior of many coupled atoms. Theorists need to catch up by taking into account many-particle effects and measurement processes before any experimental deviation from quantum mechanics could be interpreted.

Mascons are detected by Doppler shifts in the S band communication frequency from the satellite. (I don't know how this is detected from the far side of the Moon.) Apparently, the satellite itself does not undergo inertial reactions to these orbital accelerations (as one might expect from Newton's action-reaction "law") since the satellite is actually in free fall, i.e. everything within the satellite is weightless. Thus, the change in orbit is not detectable by inertial detectors (Mascons cannot be detected by accelerometers located in the satellite.) With this in mind, I don't see how the above "detector" is going to detect anything, since its surroundings are undergoing the same gravitational pulse. Eh?

[StevenJay]

This is accomplished by coupling the bar to sensitive electrical readout instruments, which were designed for the detection of gravitational waves.

Didn't they mean to say: "designed for the detection of mathemagical shuck 'n jive?" Talk about carte blanche!

Maybe I've missed something crucial, but "gravity waves" are still an assumption based on prior assumptions, aren't they? And as we all know, "Assumption" is the mother of all fu..."

Well, you know the rest.

[Oracle_911]

Lets be speculative:
-if gravitation is push from outside then something must push from outside,
-if that thing pushing from outside and because its practically undetectable for us until we reach the speed of light, it must have similar properties as super-liquid helium,
-it didn't affect charged particles that means matter in state of some kind of electric equilibrium is surrounded in droplet of aether-that special matter
-in other word the charge (electrical unbalance on/in matter) act as surface tension reducer like detergents for water.

[upriver]

"As described in Kozyrev’s first paper for the year 1971, the torsion balance did not have an equal distribution of weight on either side, as one end of the beam weighed ten grams and the other end was only one gram.

Kozyrev suspended this beam with a string (filament) of capron that was 30 micrometers in diameter and 5-10 centimeters long. The string was attached much closer to the heavier end of the beam than the lighter end, so that the beam would remain in a perfect horizontal position under the effects of gravity. This positioning also created greater stress within the beam itself, making it move very easily.

The lighter end of the beam was fashioned into a pointer, so that Kozyrev could measure on a protractor how many degrees the beam had moved at any time.

In order to avoid being influenced by the atmosphere, the entire system was sealed under a glass cap so that all of the air inside could be vacuumed out. Furthermore, Kozyrev surrounded the cap with a metal net (similar to a Faraday cage) so that all known electromagnetic influences would be shielded.

Most importantly, the top of the filament, where the beam balance was hanging from, was mechanically vibrated by an electromagnetic device.

The experiments were not considered valid unless the beam would remain perfectly still even in the presence of the extra vibrations at the top of the string. However, these extra vibrations jiggling the top of the string created a greater sensitivity to outside vibration that would reverberate throughout the entire object.

We already have an uneven set of weights that are carefully suspended on a thin string so that they remain horizontal, giving us a system that is under a lot of stress and will move very easily with the slightest touch. This is similar to the power of the lever to allow a person to lift up their entire car with the simple cranking up of the jack.

Then, when you also add the stress of the vibrations moving up and down the string and into the balance itself, you have all the necessary ingredients to make the detector so extremely sensitive that the whisper-soft pressure of torsion waves can show a measurable effect. This is one of several clever ways to capture and detect these forces. (As another example, a gyroscope may be set in motion and then hung from a string that is vibrated.)

In some senses this extra sensitivity works in the same way as an air hockey table, where you have a flat, rectangular surface with many tiny holes that shoot air straight upwards.

The game is played with a light, flat puck that is knocked back and forth by two players. If the air is running on the table, (similar to the asymmetry of the balance and the extra vibrations on the filament in Kozyrev’s experiments,) then in this case, the gravity on the puck is counteracted by an upwards force, creating a more delicate balance between the two."

[Lloyd]

Repulsion Only

SS said: a 'repulsion only' paradigm doesn't explain chemical bonding, light-matter coupling or even plain vanilla adsorption.

If the repulsion is from slow photons, I believe all such actions are well explained by repulsion. Each subatomic particle receives photons polarly and ejects them equatorially. The equatorial emission is repulsive charge. The slow photon pressure that supplies photons polarly also pushes charged particles together in chemical bonds etc, because particles that are emitting photons are constantly lowering the pressure of local slow photons, whereby the pressure of surrounding slow photons must move photons toward the low-pressure particles via their poles. Each particle is like a sump pump in a depression that shoots water outward; the water then flows back to the sump pump. In the case of photons, they shoot out at light speed and can go a tremendous distance before they are stopped and enter another "sump pump".

[webolife]

"sump pump" -- interesting, in other words a "sink", where kinetic energy due to the increasing velocity of angular momentum serves to whisk away, reflect or "repel" incoming impulses?
To SS: "Centropic Pressure" does the job for you. "Attraction" and "absorption" are simply manifestations of the universal unified centropic pressure field. Centers of gravity, "Centroids", are local aggregations of matter which serve as reference points for that centropic pressure. The piece you may be missing in your thinking, from my viewpoint, is that light is also a centropic pressure, directed to its source as a sink, rather than emitted froom it.

[seasmith]

To SS: "Centropic Pressure" does the job for you. "Attraction" and "absorption" are simply manifestations of the universal unified centropic pressure field. Centers of gravity, "Centroids", are local aggregations of matter which serve as reference points for that centropic pressure. The piece you may be missing in your thinking, from my viewpoint, is that light is also a centropic pressure, directed to its source as a sink, rather than emitted froom it.
-webolife

I think Mathis is great, and follow his work fairly regularly, but unfortunately a 'repulsion only' paradigm doesn't explain
chemical bonding, light-matter coupling or even plain vanilla adsorption.
As Feynman famously purloined, "likes like likes", doesn't necessarily mandate 'attraction' either.
There are degrees of resonance apparent in the physical realm, and they can be portrayed in electrical terms.
-s

My thinking in this case is merely that MM's 'single-pole sink and single-plane emission/repulsion' is lacking critical elements of resonance, (both spatial and temporal).

As to your "centroids/centers of gravity", i think they also require 'resonances' of (what we detect as extension/spin/orbit) momenta, to even form as self-ordering systems, which Then act as your "sinks".

Light is a special case of matter reconverting to charge, so your viewpoint of a "centropic pressure, directed to its source", is at least half right imo;
being primarily a longitudinal oscillation between source and detector.
I do think electricity is always a dual phenomena, and light is electric.
∞

[sjw40364]

Are you trying to say that the Earth is less dense than the surrounding space? To all of my knowledge pressure forces always travel from high density to low density. A cloud of gas (particles) will dissipate to the lower density regions in all cases except when current is present, especially in space. A pressure field would imply that the pressure pushing you, the aether, is more dense than the earth itself.

If shadowing is then used to compensate for why things begin to move towards one another in space in all cases of observation, then planetary orbits would in all cases be a spiral of ultimate collapse unless a motive force is also supplied to keep said planets orbit from decaying. This I personally have no problem with (the motive force, not the density issue) since I believe everything; planets, moons, asteroids, dust and plasma, protons, electrons and neutrons, all generate energy as they move through each others magnetic fields. I believe the Sun is self-powered by all its planets and environs, enough so that it has excess to spare which it radiates into space.

Of course some observations don't conform to shadowing or attraction, such as the sublunar and corresponding opposite high ocean rise at the antipodal position. In neither case is there a viable explanation for the antipodal rise. So I think we still got some work to do yet.

[Lloyd]

Mathis' Particles

SJW said: My thinking in this case is merely that MM's 'single-pole sink and single-plane emission/repulsion' is lacking critical elements of resonance, (both spatial and temporal).

Mathis' theory does not involve a single-pole sink, but a two-pole "sink". It's a single axis with two poles. Or did you mean the axis is the same as a pole? Planets and magnets are said to have two poles each normally, one north, one south. Each subatomic particle has a sink at each pole, because centrifugal force at its equator emits photons and as they are emitted the pressure is reduced inside the particle, allowing photons to enter again via the poles.
- I don't know of any critical elements of resonance that his particles are missing.

Tide Problems

SJW said: some observations don't conform to shadowing or attraction, such as the sublunar and corresponding opposite high ocean rise at the antipodal position. In neither case is there a viable explanation for the antipodal rise. So I think we still got some work to do yet.

Mathis may have the answer for that at http://milesmathis.com/tide3.html or a later paper.

[seasmith]

athis' theory does not involve a single-pole sink, but a two-pole "sink". It's a single axis with ...
=sjw wrote,

You may be thinking polarity. Naturally a pole is an axis.

[sjw40364]

Mathis' Particles

SJW said: My thinking in this case is merely that MM's 'single-pole sink and single-plane emission/repulsion' is lacking critical elements of resonance, (both spatial and temporal).

Mathis' theory does not involve a single-pole sink, but a two-pole "sink". It's a single axis with two poles. Or did you mean the axis is the same as a pole? Planets and magnets are said to have two poles each normally, one north, one south. Each subatomic particle has a sink at each pole, because centrifugal force at its equator emits photons and as they are emitted the pressure is reduced inside the particle, allowing photons to enter again via the poles.
- I don't know of any critical elements of resonance that his particles are missing.

Seasmith said that, not me , but I have doubts about any such creature called photon. Claimed to be a force carrier, yet the same photons strike objects moving in straight lines or closed orbits, yet only closed orbits expend no energy, so that theory lacks. Claimed to be a particle without mass, electric or magnetic fields, a virtual particle, so that theory lacks and violates E=mc2.
Lots of theories about photons, yet longitudinal waves seems to fit best. Not transverse waves, must make that distinction.

[webolife]

SJW,
What you are attributing to pressure "moving" is unclear... You are likely thinking of Brownian style diffusion, or of different types of conduction? While it is possible for some virtual centroids to be less dense than their field, as in the mundane example of a basketball or any kind of balloon or bubble, the earth is certainly not such a case. There are some who make such a case for the earth and also for Sol [hollow sun concept], but I don't subscribe to that idea at this time. However, you have read my repeated posts regarding black holes, that BH's may in fact be just that: empty centroids or virtual field centers of massive galaxies, whose remote measurements yield galaxy sized masses, just as the mass of a basketball is "located" at its empty centroid. From the centropic pressure field concept, a number of things happen at field centers, not necessarily limited to these:
1. The centropic vectors converge radially, this is how I think of radiation [toward the center -- increasing vector density]
2. This convergence expresses itself as the aggregation of "mass" -- density is a better parameter than mass as it expresses the exigent relationship between matter and the space it occupies.
3. The polarization of vectors leads to the manifestation of "charge".
4. Vector density at a field centroid also results in "heat", measured by temperature, and can be related thus to gravitational compression, or the homolog plasma pinch.
5. "Resistance" to compression of the centropic field is expressed as "energy" in its various forms, both potential and kinetic. Thus in the centropic field mass and energy are related as oppositely [or orthogonally] directed vectors.