Are Electrostatic forces Asymmetric?

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
1/ the Biefeld-Brown effect (relativists start having major fits if you say this effect works in a Vaccuum)
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

KoenigMKII,

Whoever cares these days of experimental results, especially by amateurs like Naudin?! Elaborate theories say "no can be - so never can be". If you want to challenge those theories - use their own formalism; if you don't learn those theories to the depth of their liking - you are declared substandard. That's the rules of the game "science".
Are you aware that magnetic monopoles were experimentally discovered 13 years ago, and these monopoles cause low-energy transmutations of elements? Those were the results of quite serious group of experimenters working in the most academic research institution of Russia, read about it here [url] arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0101/0101089.pdf [/url] and here [url] jre.cplire.ru/jre/mar00/4/text.html [/url]- this one's in Russian. Just yesterday I heard them live talking on the matter, they still stand by their results. The results have been being replicated and replicated by others, quite successfully and consistently. Nobody needs those monopoles or, God forbid, transmutations, period!

P.S. And you know what - Occam's razor cuts the steel, btw.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>

Now consider all the negative charges in the 1 KG mass, if electostatic attaction is very slighty greater than repulsion, the +ve charges in the Earth's mass will attract the mass slighty more than the -ve charges in the earth will repel them.

...You can guess my next question, is this supposed resultant force the origin of gravity?

This is too simple right?

<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

A few people have proposed gravity theories based on the notion of a slight difference between attraction and repulsion forces. The best one I have read so far has been Morton Spears capacitance theory of gravitation. The basic problem this general category of theory has (in my mind) is explaining the precise numerical value of force difference to account for gravity. You can't simply say there is a difference of attraction, you must be able to crunch a number out for it. Also, since the difference in forces is so miniscule you must account for the stability of this force ratio since from our perspective large differences in gravitation would result from the most minor perturbations of the charges involved. Any theory of this type also has the problem of explaining why gravity can't be shielded if it is merely due to electrostatic sources.

Partial quote:
"Also, since the difference in forces is so miniscule you must account for the stability of this force ratio since from our perspective large differences in gravitation would result from the most minor perturbations of the charges involved."

The difference is miniscule, but this tiny fraction must be multiplied by the number of individual nucleon and electron charges in the entire Earth, factoring in all the distances involved.

I actually believe that electrostatic fields pass though each other without distortion, at any point in space you have to take a vector sum of all the fields acting on a test charge.

On average, I think that all the individual fluctuations in postions of the individual charges are tiny with respect to their distance to a test particle, and this therefore produces a stable resultant electrostatic vector sum force, i.e. "gravity."


I think the variations in big "G" between different teams of experimenters (something like an amazing 0.5%) are caused by local
gradients in electrostactic fields caused by high charge concentrations, which deflect Zero point Energy photons.

These variations are, IMHO, the source of the Biefeld-Brown effect and the casimir force.

Here is a (Thought) experiment to test the effect (if any) of a change in electric field potential on the trajectory of the photons in a Laser beam.

Apparatus:
Four Optical mirrors
A Van Der Graff Generator
Mobile generator (the experiment is outdoors in a flat desert area.)
Laser (mounted on a surveyor's tripod)
A horzontal strip of photoelectric sensors (tripod mounted) cabled to a recording computer.

Method
The surveyors laser is set up 30m from the rest of the apparatus, it shines at the first mirror.

The mirrors are placed surrounding the (inactive) Van der Graff generator at four points of an imaginary Hexagon which is just larger than the top electrical pole [usually a metal sphere]

The photo electric detector is situated 1 Km away from the mirror and generator.

The laser is switched on, and the beam is deflected by the first mirror, to the second etc

The trajectory of the beam is 3 sides of the imaginary hexagon, then a long stetch out to detector which is 1 Km away.

Now the Van der Graff is powered up, with a time series of voltage plotted against time.

The detector then records the deflection (in any) in the laser beam.

Comments:
this does not sound like an impossible experiment, given a flat desert area to carry it out in.

I would expect a small deflection in the laser beam as it cuts though regions in which the electrical potential gradient is varied by the radial electric field.

If the experiment was to be undergone then you would need a farely stable area(as far as electricity goes)i mean to say stable power grid. It would be noticable in a small or high amount of voltage? I hypothesis it will have to greater ratio of deflection than a bigger signal which would be more dragged down.The 1km will be suffiecient is there a constant thta is broken at 1km?

The intuitive mind

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
If the experiment was to be undergone then you would need a farely stable area(as far as electricity goes)i mean to say stable power grid. It would be noticable in a small or high amount of voltage? I hypothesis it will have to greater ratio of deflection than a bigger signal which would be more dragged down.The 1km will be suffiecient is there a constant thta is broken at 1km?

The intuitive mind
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

I was thinking of a team of five people, each driving their own SUV to the Nevada Salt flats as this in a notoriously flat area. (where the land speed records were/are attempted.)

SUV 1/ with a portable diesel electrical generator. Jerrycan(s) of fuel.

SUV 2/ Tripod laser, 4 optical mirrors and mounts.

SUV 3/ Van der Graff Generator

SUV 4/ All Computer equipment + photo electric sensors. All the computer equipment should be linked via infared netorking - there ia a need to be remote from some of the apparatus. This is a safety precaution, and an attempt to cut down vibration from foot-falls.

Radio networking should be rejected because it may cause electrical interference (or be interfered with)

SUV 5/ Experiment leader with a UPS to smooth the output from the electrical generator.

In answer to your questions, I would expect to see a deflection with a higher voltage potential, as this causes a "steeper" gradient.

The 1 Km distance is not special, its just a small angle deflection needs distance to amplify (by trigonometry) any "signal."

Its a tough job to line everything up, and it needs a dry (low humidity = fewer accidental discharges)day.

Unequal thermal expansion due to intense sunlight is a major Noise threat so perhaps just before dawn is a good time to take the "wraps" off the apparatus.

Then with the first light, fire up the apparatus and start the experiment.