Antigravity Research

<b>[stoat] " ... the debate was about which way was the best way to teach ... "</b>

There is always a debate about the best way to teach. This was different. It was about what to teach.

<b>[stoat] " ... an electron traveling at the speed of light, will only double it's mass ... "</b>

This is wrong for two reasons.

1)
Since that change of understanding in the late 80s the mass of an electron is understood to be a constant. I believe the modern terminology is that "mass is an invariant quantity". Mass is not now (and actually never was) a function of speed. Big Science was just wrong about this bit of relativity theory before the 1990s.

2)
Before Big Science corrected its mistaken notion about the relationship between speed and mass, the mass of an electron (or any other bit of matter) moving at the speed of light would have been calculated to be infinite. (It would not have actually been infinite, of course, and failed attempts to detect the predicted mass increase as v =&gt; c were a big part of what led to the change in understanding.)

LB

Hi Larry, I've no great problems with what you're saying but relativistic mass i implicit in E = mc^2 That they failed to detect the mass increase, is surely support for our contention that the speed of light is not the top speed, gravity is faster. we'd get for Tom's speed of gravity,
M = m / sqrt(1 - c^2 / b^2) where is the speed of gravity.
That's M = 9.11E-31 / sqrt(1 - 2.9E 8^2 / 5.9E 18^2)
So that's about 9.11E-31 / sqrt(1 - 2.5E-21) There is a relativistic mass increase ut it's so tiny that my calculator doesn't want to know about it.

With my proposed speed of gravity, the electron doubles its rest mass, a far cry from infinity. The only reason I wanted to allow for a increased relativistic mass; in terms of the speed of light; was to show that it had been considered. As I say for Fermi velocities of about
1.5E 6 m/s it's rather small beer anyway.

(Anyone interested with regards to this can have a look at this article form John Baez math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/mass.html )

Hi Cosmic and Evolvid, remember that I've got two electrons; or two charged particles; between thumb and forefinger and I squeeze them together so that they touch at twice the Compton wavelength of the particle. I've only looked at the electron so far. To get my speed of gravity I need to push them into each other a little further. So what to do to keep that radius? Stick in a cosine theta. My, admittedly rough calculation, is a third of a radian. If I superglued one electron to my thumb, then let the other one lose, it would leap away at an angle of a third of a radian. No superglue and both would leap away at half of a third of a radian. Now that's interesting, in that Kanerev has a simple cosine rule for whether a toroidal electron accepts or ejects a photon. Then there's that six turns of the electron "coil." Not the slightest idea what it could all mean yet but there's something there. it looks like virtual particles, if such exist, could play bulls and bears with a "seeming" negative time, of about 1E-19 seconds.

Hi Stoat and Larry, First off I agree with the article that "relativistic mass" is a useful term. E=MC^2 is the rest mass, but certainly this equation is not an accurate definition of MASS in relativistic terms as to how the Graviton Capture energy cycles determine weight and gravitational forces. First off MASS is processing gravitational energies at faster than light speeds, this balancing act can be manipulated and as depicted in the article that used the "ruler" example---can as shown to take place in the John Hutchison video's---be made under certain circumstances to levitate. So, a levitating ruler is now in relativistic terms out of sinc with the gravity field due to increased antigraviton emmissions which certainly are not accurately depicted anywhere in current theory.

Stoat, getting back to Neutron K capture and failed proton concept. I think Proton's are verticle emmiters that control the atomic gyroscopic motion alligned to the gravity well from terminating gravitons in proton core polarity reversals. Protons emit antigratons causing a repulsive force to matter (G-FORCE) and gravity well. I think Neutrons are looped together by an electrical circuit (electron core) allowing for great geometric variation in atomic structure around protons. The gluon circuit between a quark and antiquark is 100 times stronger than the nuclear force, maybe the gluon circuit is an exact model of our large scale graviton exchange and the nuclear strong force is reduced from a counter balanced repulsive exiting antigravitons from proton cores.

Neutron Stars seem to have locked up all of its quark/antiquark pairs in an electrical prison. So that Protons long ago were repulsed away from an ever growing antimatter core. It may be that the gravitons are flying so fast through the neutron mesh between and repulsive huge neutron electrical circuit, that actually the Neutron star is in beginning stages of forming a black hole. Antimatter cores generate tremendous reverse torque causing polar ring antimatter annihilation zones and relativity jets. Captured circulating graviton polar magnetic fields must begin to flatten and twist around an ever growing antimatter core that now develops the typical hour glass ecliptic top and bottom antigraviton exiting radiations.

So, rest mass dynamics are subject to relative field interference with the graviton cycle that drives all atomic motions. We cannot determine any Energy level of mass without first looking at the FTL graviton interactions, our current notions are incomplete and do not understand how energy cycles take place in Universe. John

Hi John, I'm still in a hopeless muddle over this. The sums are pretty simple but what's happening isn't. We've got the esu which for an electron; with the radius set at twice the Compton wavelength gives us a force of about 1.09E-5 newtons. Now to get the emu we have to divide that by C^2 So I thought what do we have to divide through by to get the gravitational force; which of course is tiny in comparison.

I get 1.09E-5 /2b*c^2 Where b is the speed of gravity.

This is for the gravitational force between two electrons separated by twice the Compton wavelength of the electron. Again I've not the maths to more than a couple of decimal places but it looks good.

Anyway, for electrons we end up with a quadratic equation of ut + bt^2 where we use the Fermi velocity for u. This gives us two roots of a positive time and a negative time. As I say we can use the negative time root in a bec space. That's okay when we talk about virtual particles anyway. If the two roots are equal but opposite, that would be your bog standard virtual particle but if they're not, then the electron can play "bulls and bears".

A little thought about the Fermi velocity, I've only seen a little table of them for metals, and they are all in the range of about one hundredth the speed of light. Is there a material with a fermi velocity of 137th the speed of light? The fine structure constant does seem to pop up from time to time. Does anyone know what the fermi velocity for metallic hydrogen is? Bear in mind that such a metal can have a very low temperature but still be "hot."

So, what i think happens with the proton and neutron will probably come down to just how it can play the bull and bear markets. It looks like charge and time have close numerical values. The electron has about has about 4E-19 seconds to borrow energy from the past or future, whilst the proton has less time, about 1E-20 seconds. Of course we do need to do the quadratics to see what sort of deal it can broker.

so I was thinking about the Anti gravity thing and this is what I got
if you take away all the electrons from a atom can photons increase its spin and would that cause the swartschild vertex to absorb and emit more vacuum gravity ?

MARX

Hi Stoat and evolivid! As I see it the Proton is the core to all atomic activity, processing polarity reversals from the large scale graviton cycle. The charge parity time relativity changes for Neutrons because electron absorption within protons stops the core processing of gravitons so that now the Neutron becomes locked in an electronic assembly and emits only in light spectrum range. What this means is that Neutrons only react in our local time giving mass a forward time signature, whereas Proton's really are interacting with large scale polarity reversals with what would appear as a mini-black hole in its core with a polar antigraviton one way emmiter/gun causing the vertical axis and gravity well allignment for atomic mass.

ESU/EMU=gravitational parity. If magnetic fields are accelerated polarization takes place causing greater proton core antigraviton production. The Searl Effect Generator strips electrons from the atmosphere with increased ionization, electrons repulse gravitons as they flow towards the core causing gravitons to speed up resulting in increased antigraviton production streaming away from object forming a vertical "vortex wormwhole" of cold air that is now out of balance with local relativity. This acceleration process can create a vacuum state above the craft and combined with the pushing effect of the gravitons accelerate the craft at extreme speeds.

So, Marx creation is part of a huge circuit, just as there are power lines from utility that completes the negative to positive electron current the graviton cycle also has to complete a circuit back to the positive side. Protons alone will not create an antigravity effect, it is caused by electrons repulsing gravitons. John