Page 13 of 20
Robert Stirniman's
Antigravity Bibliography - 13
               -------------------------------------

If you work out the metric for EM waves circulating in a cavity you get
some strange results. There is a preliminary discussion of this effect
in the article by Houshang Ardavan, 'Gravitational Waves from
Electromagnetic Waves' in the book "Classical General Relativity,"
edited by W.B. Bonner, I.N. Islam and M.A.H. MacCollum (Cambridge Univ.
Press, 1984).
It is something I have seen done. At the point in an annular cavity
where the phase velocity goes from less than c to greater than c, a term
shows up in the derived metric of the system that looks like a source
term.  On the other hand you have assumed that the metric is source free
in the EM region of the cavity.  So you get a solution which contradicts
the hypothesis that went into building the solution. You get something
which is possibly unphysical.  Now Einstein's equation and the associated
geometry is pretty tricky and it is easy to get unphysical solutions.
The final arbitors of whether a solution is satisfactory or not is
physical reasonability and self consistancy (these are almost the same
thing). The cavity problem seems very physically reasonable initially,
but ends with a self-consistancy problem which appears to be unphysical.
Also, Cauchy's theorem does not apply to this case since it becomes a
mixed type problem (elliptic and hyperbolic PDEs), so the Hawking
singularity theorems don't a priori apply. It is something very
interesting, but to publish it with out being scoffed at would take
a lot of work and possibly inventing some new math.
-- Jim McClune, University of Missouri
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROTATING FIELDS IN GENERAL RELATIVITY, by Islam, J.N.
Begins with a short introduction to the relevant aspects of general
relativity. This is followed by a detailed derivation of the
Wehl-Lewis-Papapetrou form of the stationary axially symmetric metric.
The Kerr and Tomimatsu-Sato forms of the rotating interior and
exterior solutions of the Einstein equations are then considered.
Subject: physics
1985 6 X 9 122 pp. 4 diagrams
Hardback 0-521-26082-5 47.95 (£7.99) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- >If an EM field is somehow rotated extremely fast, shouldn't all >matter be repelled from its center? -kgo. How fast do you want it rotated? It's fairly simple to construct a system to produce rotating EM waves at whatever rotational velocity you wish by feeding a pair of broadside dipole arrays with quatrature phased waves. It is quite simple to construct a system that would have a rotational velocity of C within the uniform field area. It might also be fairly easy to do this with a Hemholtz coil arangement as well, but the broadside array will be much easier to do at easily engineerable frequencies. Some really interesting paradoxes come about when the rotational frequency is high enough so that the rotational velocity exceeds C within the uniform field area of the arrays or within the hemholtz coils. -- Robert Shannon ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ehrenfest Paradox (Ehrenfest, 1909) -- The special relativistic "paradox" involving a rapidly rotating disc. Since any radial segment of the disc is perpendicular to the direction of motion, there should be no length contraction of the radius; however, since the circumference of the disc is parallel to the direction of motion, it should contract. Question -- by Kung Lo (October 1995): Take a rigid disk of radius R and spin it up to angular velocity . As seen by an observer S that is at rest in the center of the disk, the radius is still R, but the circumference is contracted by the Lorentz effect. How is this possible? More physically, if a fixed ring is just outside the spinning disk and placed with equally spaced markers on the rim of the disk and on the fixed ring, I know by symmetry that, when one marker on the disk is aligned with a marker on the ring, all pairs of markers must be aligned. This contradicts the fact that, for observer S, the distance between successive markers on the disk is reduced by the Lorentz factor. Answer -- provided by David Djajaputra (November 1995): It seems that the rotating disk paradox (it turned out to be Ehrenfest's paradox) has been extensively analyzed by many people (including Einstein himself, who developed general relativity to answer this problem, as one author speculates...). This I found from a nice paper : O. Gron, "Relativistic description of a rotating disk" Am. J. Phys. V43, 869 (1975), and all the references therein. The key sentence in Gron's paper is at the end of Section IV: "By definition a Born rigid motion of a body leaves lenghts unchanged, when measured in the body's proper frame . (...) A Born rigid motion is not a material property of the body, but the result of a specific program of forces designed to set the body in motion without introducing stresses. (...) A transition of the disk from rest to rotational motion, while it satisfies Born's definition of rigidity, is a kinematic impossibility" With this kinematics the radius is R and the circumference is as measured by observer S (lab frame), but an observer riding on the disk will measure a distance R to the center and a distance around the circumference (he can do this measurement by slowly walking around the spinning disk with a meter tape). This is consistent with the usual Lorentz contraction . The point is that this is NOT a Born rigid motion. There is much more in Gron's paper. -- Vittorio Celli ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Several key pharases keep popping up regarding rotating fields, powerful magnetic pulsed fields, and 90 degree cross-field phase shifts. For example, Preston Nicholes describes a device known as a Delta T antenna in the Montauk series of books. The Delta T antenna is described as a pyramidal structure, but lets just take two square loops, placed at 90 degrees to each other, and feed these two loops with an RF signal, also with a 90 degree phase shift, we will produce a rotating magnetic field within the loops (these loops share a common center point, and each loop is in a plane 90 degrees from the other) The speed of rotation of this magnetic field is a direct function of the frequancy of the applied RF signal. At the center of the antenna, the rotational velocity is zero, but as you move out from the center, and rotational velocity increases. At some distance from center would reach the speed of light, dependant of the frequancy used. One could imagine that the rotational velocity of this rotating magnetic field could reach the speed of light within the antenna structure itself if a way could be found to make the antenna much larger than a normaly resonant antenna would be for that same frequancy. At several hundred megahertz, a two meter per side square loop would have a rotational velocity well in excess of the speed of light within the antenna structure itself. What effect would there be at the boundry where the rotational velocity reached, and then exceeded the speed of light. How could the magnetic field even propogate to the center of the antenna structure if it would have to move faster than light to reach that space? If hemholtz coils were used instead of loops, the magnetic field strength would be uniform inside the structure, how could the field strenght be uniform if there is not sufficient time for the field to propogate through the space inside the structure itself? Could such an effect actually generate a wormhole like phenomena, at energy levels far below that of neutron stars and such? As the causal mechanism, the magnetic field, is in roation, would this describe a traversable worm hole as has been postulated in relationship to rotating black holes? -- Robert Shannon -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Aono, Osamu, 1937- Rotation of a magnetic field / Osamu Aono and Ryo Sugihara. Nagoya, Japan : Institute of Plasma Physics, Nagoya University, 1986. 6 p. ; 30 cm. LC CALL NUMBER: QC717.6 .N35 no. 792 (ALTERNATE CLASS QC754.2.M3) SUBJECTS: Magnetic fields. Electrodynamics. Research report (Nagoya Daigaku. Purazumu Kenkyujo) ; IPPJ-792. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Let me clear this up a bit, the two coils are acting as antenne already, producing the rotating field by vector sumnation of the radiated quatrature phased EM waves. The loops would be operating as the driven elements of a cubical antenne, not as coils as such. If you prefer, substitute the two loop antenne with a pair of crossed dipoles at 90 degrees, this will also produce the rotating field, but the center will be occupied by the dipoles rather than be open as with loop antenne of by using sets of broadside arrays. Note that this is not the same as the rotational speed reaching c inside the "uniform field" area, as described earlier. It's simple a tool to understsand the generation of the rotating field and the relationship between applied frequency and the resultant roational speed. Rather than loop elements, in practice you might use a phased array of dipole elements that produces a constant phase plane wave, not unlike a pair of hemholtz coils produced a uniform field within the coil sets. Four of these "broadside arrays" would from the four sides of a cube, inside of which you could induce the fast rotating fields from the radiated EM waves. In all cases, the driven elements are lauching EM waves a c. Only the vector sum of the two (of four) quatrature fields is in rotation, which leads us back the the question of what happens as the rotational velocity of the sum of these EM fields reaches c within the field generator, and there is not sufficient time for the fields to propogate accross the Vr=c boundry? This is the point where two different physists have tried to lead me dowm the garden path of "red shifted magnetic fields". I'm not sure I'm ready to buy that concept just yet. -- Robert Shannon --------------------------------------------------------------------------- GENERAL RELATIVITY & QUANTUM COSMOLOGY, ABSTRACT GR-QC/9601034 From: Tevian Dray Date: Mon, 22 Jan 1996 10:57:03 PST The Rotating Quantum Vacuum Author(s): Paul C. W. Davies , Tevian Dray , Corinne A. Manogue Report-no: ADP 95-43/M36 (University of Adelaide) We derive conditions for rotating particle detectors to respond in a variety of bounded spacetimes and compare the results with the folklore that particle detectors do not respond in the vacuum state appropriate to their motion. Applications involving possible violations of the second law of thermodynamics are briefly addressed. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm also saying that a pair of crossed coils will start behaving differently when the driving frequency is so high that the field lines near them try to exceed the speed of light. At low frequencies the coils create a rotating magnetic field. At high frequencies they send out radio waves having a rotating field vector (circularly polarized waves, in other words.) WITHIN the volume of the coils the fields still rotate, at least until the frequency is raised so high that the coils are many wavelengths across. At these frequencies the fields in the center of the crossed coils would be of complex shape, maybe some kind of contracting spiral. (Which is interesting, because at very high frequencies there would be a "hot spot" at the exact center of the crossed coils.) -- Robert Shannon ------------------------------------------------------------------------- On similar topic: anyone ever heard of the "CFA antenna" flap in the UK? CFA is for "crossed-field antenna." There were a bunch of articles and letters to the editor in EWW, "Electronics and Wireless World," the British engineering mag. The CFA-believers though they had discovered a way to make 1-foot antennas which were efficient at 100-meter wavelengths. The key to the CFA was to create the e- and b-fields separately: feed both a coil-loop and a pair of capacitor-spheres with separate high-current and high-voltage signals respectively, orient them 90deg to produce a broadside wave, shift the phases with L/C networks to form the proper EM wave (90? zero? ), and then obtain a powerful EM emission from a tiny antenna. There was a great quantity of argument and name-calling over this, all done in slow-motion over many months of letters in the letters-to-the-editor column. Then it just died away. Either the pro-CFA side couldn't prove that it worked, or nobody believed the proof they did find. -- William Beaty -------------------------------------------------------------------------- And some comments about rotating EM fields by Dr Dennis Cravens in a report titled "Electric Propulsion Study", done for the Astronautics Laboratory at Edwards AFB. August 1990. Dennis Cravens was formerly with SAIC Corp, and is now working with CETI in development of cold fusion. Anyway, here's some things he says in the electric propulsion report about the "peculiarities" of a rotating magnet: ROTATION OF MAGNETS - There is a continuing debate in physics as to the reality of the magnetic field. The prime question is whether the axial magnetic field of a bar magnet rotates with the magnet or is stationary. The Faraday homopolar generator dates back to the 1830s. DePalma, Tewari, and others have attempted to utilize the Faraday generator to produce more power than needed to run it. Most objective reviews of the work have, however, failed to see such effects. It is doubtful that these claims will be independently validated and even more doubtful that they will lead directly to a propulsive system. However, the work on homopolar generators as high current devices is reasonable and may be useful for ground uses. The angular momentum complications seem to rule the system out for any practical space applications. SEARL EFFECT - The Searl Effect is a separate issue from homopolar generator above. Searl has claimed to produce disk levitation by rapidly rotating magnets. There have been claims of anti-gravity, high electric fields, perpetual motion, inertial loss, and gas ionization. All these claims come from Searl or those supportive of his work and no outside witnesses are available. Searl has not supplied any technical data or specifics of the operation in any easily referenced source. It is not recommended that his work be experimentally followed by the USAF. It is worth noting however, that a rotating magnet does have some definite theorectical peculiarities. Through the years there have been many interesting developments concerning the Faraday Homopolar generator. DePalma has claimed to get more energy out than is supplied to the the generator. None of the claims seem to withstand careful examination and no machine has ever been made self driving. The underlying reason that such claims continue to surface is that rotating magnetic fields are extremely difficult to handle within existing theories. This is because for a rotating frame there is a distance (removed from the axis) which is travelling at velocities greater than c. Although the distance is not withing any real physical object, it's existence within the mathematical development greatly complicates any calculations. DePalma B.E., "Electro-Mechanical Device for the Amplification of Electrical Power", The New Age Science Magazine, No 7, 1980 Tewari P., "Generation of Electrical Power from Absolute Vacuum by High Speed Rotation of Conducting Magnetic Cylinder", Tech. Rep. Dept. of Atomic Energy, Bombay India, 1985 Searl, J.R.R., British provisional patent specification #57578, 1970 --------------------------------------------------------------------- These articles are indicative of studies of EM waves and rotating bodies. It appears that when EM waves pass through rotating dielectrics some unusual effects are predicted. This may lead to some interesting future technology. -- Dr Dennis Cravens "Some Remarks on Scattering by a Rotating Dielectric Cylinder", D. Schreiber, Journal of EM Waves and Applications, Vol 2 No2 1988 "Rotating Bodies and Electrodynamics in a Rotating Reference Frame", I.B. Zeldovich and L.V. Rozhavskii, Radiofizka Vol 29 No 9, 1986 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Here's an interesting news brief from Infinite Energy magazine, July/Aug 1995, Dr Eugene Mallove - editor. (603)-228-4516 A bombshell paper has just been published in the American Journal of Physics, Vol 63 No 8, August 1995, pages 694-705, "Maxwell's Equations in a Rotating Medium: Is There a Problem?" by Gerald N. Pellegrini and Arthur R. Swift (the latter of the Dept of Physics and Astronomy, University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA)" The paper is a direct challenge to Special Relativity. It proves one of two things about a classic 1913 experiment of Wilson and Wilson that was used to verify the prediction of relativity that "a moving magnetic dipole develops an electric dipole moment.' The conclusion of the paper is that Special Relativity does NOT agree with this experiment -- and no one has ever challenged the quality of the experiment. Peregrinni told Infinite Energy that he thinks that all of relativity as well as Maxwell's equations as descriptors of EM radiation are now called into question. --------------------------------------------------------------------- The origin of the Montauk Project dates back to 1943 when radar invisibility was being researched aboard the USS Eldridge. As the Eldridge was stationed at the Philadelphia Navy Yard, the events concerning the ship have commonly been referred to as the "Philadelphia Experiment." The objective of this experiment was to make the ship undetectable to radar and while that was achieved, there was a totally unexpected and drastic side effect. The ship became invisible to the naked eye and was removed from time and space as we know it. It went into 10-dimensional hyper-space. For further info into this, read the book called "Hyperspace" by Dr. Michio Kaku. A movie called "The Philadelphia Experiment" was made, but delayed for two years as the Pentagon was able to halt its release. After the war, research continued under the tutelage of Dr. John Von Neumann who had directed the technical aspects of the Phily Experiment. A massive human factor study was also begun at Brookhaven National Labs on Long Island, New York -- known as the Phoenix Project. The Montauk Project culminated on August 12, 1983. A full blown time portal was fully functioning, but things were out of control and the project was crashed. An unauthorized video has been widely distributed regarding this story and several lectures has been given on the Montauk Project. One science reported for the New York times started the project but tacked off when he discovered to his own surprise that the Montauk Project was indeed real. Three books have been released by Preston Nichols, who was involved in the Project, and Peter Moon. They are 1) The Montauk Project: Experiments in Time - 1992 2) Montauk Revisited: Adventures in Synchronicity - 1994 3) Pyramids of Montauk Explorations in Consciousness-1995 This coming year, 1996, the next book will be out and the title will be "Montauk Reconciled" -- Richard Frager ------------------------------------------------------------------------ HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS - PHENOMENOLOGY, ABSTRACT HEP-PH/9412234 From: Michael Martin Nieto 505-667-6127 Date: Mon, 5 Dec 94 09:52:27 -0700 THEORETICAL MOTIVATION FOR GRAVITATION EXPERIMENTS ON ULTRA-LOW ENERGY ANTIPROTONS AND ANTIHYDROGEN Authors: Michael Martin Nieto , T. Goldman , John D. Anderson , Eunice L. Lau, J. Perez-Mercader Comments: Written version of invited contribution to LEAP'94: Third Biennial Conference on Low-Energy Antiproton Physics. We know that the generally accepted theories of gravity and quantum mechanics are fundamentally incompatible. Thus, when we try to combine these theories, we must beware of physical pitfalls. Modern theories of quantum gravity are trying to overcome these problems. Any ideas must confront the present agreement with general relativity, but yet be free to wonder about not understood phenomena, such as the dark matter problem and the anomalous spacecraft data which we announce here. This all has led some intrepid" theorists to consider a new gravitational regime, that of antimatter. Even more daring" experimentalists are attempting, or considering attempting, the measurement of the gravitational force on antimatter, including low-energy antiprotons and, perhaps most enticing, antihydrogen. HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS - EXPERIMENT, ABSTRACT HEP-EX/9412018 From: PHILLIPS@hep.phy.duke.edu Date: Fri, 30 Dec 1994 16:03:31 -0500 (EST) A Technique for Directly Measuring the Gravitational Acceleration of Antihydrogen, By: Thomas J. Phillips, Duke University Durham Comments: Written version of invited contribution to LEAP'94: Third Biennial Conference on Low-Energy Antiproton Physics. The gravitational force on antimatter has never been directly measured. A method is suggested for measuring the acceleration of antimatter(\overline g)$by measuring the deflection of a beam of neutral antihydrogen atoms in the Earth's gravitational field. While a simple position measurement of the beam could be used, a more efficient measurement can be made using a transmission interferometer. A 1\% measurement of$\overline g$should be possible from a beam of about 100,000 atoms, with the ultimate accuracy being determined largely by the number of antihydrogen atoms that can be produced. A method is suggested for producing an antihydrogen beam appropriate for this experiment. HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS - PHENOMENOLOGY, ABSTRACT HEP-PH/9509336 From: Michael Martin Nieto 505-667-6127 Date: Tue, 19 Sep 95 14:08:11 -0600 Antimatter Gravity and Antihydrogen Production Authors: Michael H. Holzscheiter , T. Goldman , Michael Martin Nieto Certain modern theories of gravity predict that antimatter will fall differently than matter in the Earth's gravitational field. However, no experimental tests of gravity on antimatter exist and all conclusions drawn from experiments on matter depend, at some level, on a specific model. We have proposed a direct measurement that would compare the gravitational acceleration of antiprotons to that of negatively charged hydrogen ions. Substantial progress towards the development of this experiment has been achieved. Based on our work a number of alternative proposals for measuring $g\$" on both
charged and neutral antimatter have been made. We summarize the
present status of our experiment and also discuss the steps that
would be necessary to produce antihydrogen in an environment
suitable for gravity measurements.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Robert, I have one reference for you. The book is called
"Suppressed Inventions and other Discoveries". It's an anthology edited
by Jonathon Eisen. Authors include: Dr. Brian O'Leary, Christopher Bird,
Jeanne Manning, Barry Lynes, and others. As well as Townsend Brown, the
inventers/doctors (as well as inventions the book also covers various
cancer treatments which have had research suppressed) who are discussed
include Naessons, RifeHoxsey, Gerson, Tesla, Brown, Reich and others.

The book covers free energy, various "unfree" though different
motive technologies, cancer cures which have worked but not seen
approval by the AMA, Roswell, the Mars face, and as a delight to
conspiracy buffs, there are also chapters on how various Government
bodies have suppressed these technologies, as well as how the AMA came
to be all powerful in the field of suppressing alternate treatments.

Auckland Institute of Technology Press
Private Bag 92006
Auckland, New Zealand

ISBN No. 0-9583334-7-5
______________________________________________________________________

For further research, consult the following sources:

Fer-de-Lance by T.E. Beardon
Tesla Book Company
P.O. Box 121873
Chula Vista, CA  91912  USA