Antigravity Research

Hi Stoat, I will have to take a look at Robert Carroll's model I like the symmetry. I had another insight into Neutron's maybe a local electrical polar loop forms between chains of Neutron's binding them inside the nucleus so that they do not move---only the internal motion quark/antiquark pairs are in motion and the central Proton now becomes the Axis for reverse polarity inductance creating an Antigraviton pulse from the wrapping strong forces of the Graviton Capture process. This would solve lateral mass development problems and still allow the processing of incoming Gravitons at the core. I am thinking that the Electron Looping is in motion and forms the geometries necessary for Atomic Mass Formations of different Atomic Weights that form Matter. Unless in space, Matter atomic gyroscopic allignment would still allign with the gravity well even though the Neutron's might not be moving around with Electrons but held in place forming complex geometries as seen in atomic formations.

Randall Mills Fractal Ground States:

Using a proprietory process Randall was able to lower the Electron orbits in H plasma's and create a whole new hydride class of matter. The Black Light Process operates outside of existing known physics, and fits perfectly with the Graviton Capture Model. Which suggests that the bulk of energy is in the Graviton Cycle, and not bound in the local atomic motions. Such that Electrons carry the same charge as Gravitons and thus lowering the Electron orbit to fractal ground states will release and "TAP" this repulsed released GM capacitance that is held in place by the circulating Gravitons at superluminal speeds producing 1000:1 power ratio's as a high temperature plasma. So, are you saying that force mass accelerations are some how multiplied by the Electron as twice the speed of gravity? John

Here is another take on the geometry and motion question. I see Electron's as a "HOT" Vacua Plasma that moves around arcing with everything especially the Graviton Strong Force binding the nucleus and Positron's are "COLD" Vacua Plasma (reverse spin) that arcs and bleeds off heat towards the exiting Antigravitons. This EM field would form sub loops through the Nuetron's and interact with the core vacua Electron orbits. So that the purpose of the Electron acts as a slippage or side vent for the excessive energy being released from the greater Graviton Cycle itself. Now, this hot ELECTRON plasma must release energies back towards reverse time as Feynman Advanced Waves by interacting with POSITRONS forming micro annihilation bursts that vent back towards the Proton Core polarity reversal antimatter induction Antigraviton Pulse. Otherwise, nuclear over heating would occur and the atomic dynamo exchange processes would fail catastrophically with an extreme explosion. Without the "bleeding" pulsed release of excess energy by Electron/Positron interactions that complete the local circuit as part of the large scale GRAVITON CYCLE the atomic circuits would fail. Thus, some how either in a hidden dimension Positrons are either moving in the opposite directions to Electrons causing field reactions which release excess energy towards the exiting antigravitons in cores of Protons, or their is a coupling process when positron/electrons are temporarily alligned to the gravity well GRAVITON POLARITY REVERSALS releasing excess heat build-up completing the Electrical Circuit. In other words, this is a complex energy distribution system that allows for gravity field stabillity without feeling the effects of extreme orbital motion---allowing not only biological systems to evolve, but the formation of incredible diversity of complex crystalline structures all integrated to an extreme power source that from an engineering standpoint is a perfect designed system of energy exchange! John

Hi John, really odd that i mentioned Robert Carroll. When you said that you needed to take a look at his stuff, I thought, really hard to find his stuff on the web, it's as if the mean never existed. Was he a spook I wonder?

He worked for the navy, and he's said to have written the book on mach speeds. One of his students was Alan Shepherd. So, did he work on the Air Force "Right Stuff" projects before the advent of NASA? He was in the right place for it.

he invents, and patents a drive unit which utilizes resonant k capture, a much more powerful sort of Sakarov drive. He takes the idea to Washington and has harsh words to say about the president's scientific advisor. Note that he gets in to see him!

His work on room temperature superconductors has him chatting with Pauli. When i did a google search I put in his name, superconductors and bismuth. What it came up with was exactly what you are talking about. The hydrino and fractional quantum numbers. Something that Carroll had written papers on but no one can find them.

I found a couple of e books by him, that were hidden in a folder on the website of an adventure holiday company! Very odd that, they must have been found by the company and binned.

Okay, if fractional quantum orbits of electrons is allowed, then we are talking about a small number of allowed elliptical orbits. Let's say that we can induce this in the ground state electron. Make the orbit so elongated that the electron smashes into the nucleus, k capture.

How I'm getting on with the esu. Another thing that's driving me mad.
We've got k_e * Q_1*Q_2 / r^2
ke = 9.8755E-9 multiply that by the charge on the electron squared to get 2.307o7955E-28
Dive that by twice the Compton wavelength squared to get the force needed to get two electrons to touch each other.
That comes out at 3.9189E-5 Newtons
f=ma so divide by twice the electron mass to get an acceleration of 2.151E 25
integrate that twice to get displacement = ut + 2.151E 25 /2 t^2

But this value for the speed of gravity, about 1.07E 25 is low compared to my best guess of 2.1646E 25
I had to get the two electrons closer to a radius of 2*2.33E-12 squared. That's okay, as the radius of the toroidal electron is r+R

Anyway, if we take the displacement as being the Compton wavelength we can t.
2.4E-12 = ut + 1/2 v t^2
What's u? If it's zero then t is going to be about 4.5E-19 but u is going to be pretty fast, about the Fermi velocity, and for copper, that's about 2.7E 6 metres per second.

So, we've got a quadratic equation and my first thought was to simply dump the negative time solution as meaningless but I'm sure you'd disagree with that.

Anyway, I'm hoping Evolvid is still about to take a look at this. He's got the software to to draw graphs of how electrons behave vis a vis their Fermi velocities in various metals. of great interest would be the value of u when we are talking about protons. Remember that the Fermi velocity has to be an average in an electron sea but in the nucleus protons haven't got the room. Thinking about that, quarks will need some work as they have fractional charges.

A couple of more thoughts on this. It's important to realize that the Fermi velocity is at absolute zero. A lump of copper say, Fermi velocity 1.57E 6 metres per second, at absolute zero; so what's moving the electrons around? zpe is the standard answer but I think it's down to the speed of gravity.

Second point, if we are talking about Fermi velocities, then we have to increase the mass of the electron to its relativistic mass. However, I don't believe that there is anything like the supposed mass increase.

FYI, the concept of relativistic mass was quietly placed in the dust bin of history in the late 1980s/early 1990s. (If you snooze, you lose.)

Hi Larry, in the eighties the debate was about which way was the best way to teach. Express the Lorentzian in terms of kinetic energy or momentum. The core notion that nothing can go faster than light is still holy writ. Though as I've said a few times, the blue eyed boys and girls of CERN are; seem to be; quietly dumping Einstein in favour of a "new" Lorentzian.

Now, using the relativistic mass of a charged particle doesn't help me, it actually lowers the speed of gravity from where I think it is. My post was trying to get Evolvid to do all the work, and I thought while he was on it, he might as well graph out those figures as well []

One of the reasons why I like my speed of gravity, is that an electron traveling at the speed of light, will only double it's mass. It's only when we get up near the speed of gravity, that we need to worry about the dreaded divide by zero. Not even then really, as I think the speed of gravity takes a log form.

Back to the question in hand. Two electrons cheek by jowl in the esu.
F = k_e * Q^2 / r^2
Stick some rough numbers in.
8.9E 9 * (1.602E-19)^2 / (2 * 2.4E-12)^2 = 9.913E-6 Newtons
Divide by the mass of an electron to get an acceleration of about 1.08E 25 metres per second^2

I think that's in the all park for the speed of gravity.

The emu, how does that fit in?
F = k_m * I^2 / r

C^2 = k_e / k_m So we take that force of 9.913E-6 and divide it by C^2 That gives us a force of 1.1029E-22 Newtons. Divide that by the mass of an electron. To give us an acceleration of about 1.2106E 8 metres per second^2 Say about a third of the speed of light.

If we then say we have the radius stay the same; twice the Compton wavelength, our current is going to be about
5.142E-14 Amps.

While we're on we might as well stick a few other equations in there as well.
E = k_e * Q / r^2 the electric field intensity
V = k_e * Q / r Volts
W = Q * V Work

The tricky bit is whether we should allow negative times, from the quadratics we get. I'll leave that for now, to think about the ramifications of it. In a bec material it has to be allowed. The odd thing though, is that a virtual particle might be able to chose whether to borrow, and pay back, from the future or the past. It could play bulls and bears.