Quote from: fvlad on 03/10/2018 12:13 pmOther questions have answers in my essays. No, actually they aren't answered there.
Other questions have answers in my essays.
Contrary to experiments you are asserting the existence of an aether, dismissing the real results from actual experiments of gravitational wave detectors. Here is an article describing how well that gravitational waves have been measured relative to the speed of light. Links to the original research are in the article.Quote... another team made up of a small army of physicists used the burst of gamma rays captured from last month's neutron star collision to come up with their own estimate. Their method was a little more precise. Ok, a whole lot more precise. They found the difference between the lightning flash of the gamma ray burst and the thunderclap of the gravitational wave was extremely close - within -3 x 10^-15 and 7 x 10^-16 of c. Close enough to call it a tie, really. This completely invalidates your claim of a gravitational aether and your claim that gravitational waves aren't correlated with actual events of large objects merging
... another team made up of a small army of physicists used the burst of gamma rays captured from last month's neutron star collision to come up with their own estimate. Their method was a little more precise. Ok, a whole lot more precise. They found the difference between the lightning flash of the gamma ray burst and the thunderclap of the gravitational wave was extremely close - within -3 x 10^-15 and 7 x 10^-16 of c. Close enough to call it a tie, really.
Quote from: meberbs on 03/11/2018 02:24 am Quote from: fvlad on 03/10/2018 12:13 pmOther questions have answers in my essays. No, actually they aren't answered there. Dear meberbs, In my essay https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2806 https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080 there are answers to many questions. For example, you wrote about a very interesting for all question: the speed of propagation of gravitational waves.
Concerning gravitational waves then in my essay it is said: «Gravitational waves are stationary, as particles and they are vortex gravitational toroidal fields, which can be transforming into photons and vice versa. Their action is observing in shape of plurality annular orbital resonances». https://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/resources/5836/?category=images (the image of the Earth in the orbital gravitational wave "orbital resonance").
I.e., during the binary mergers there was a transformation of gravitational waves in the gravispheres of neutron stars into photons. It is clear that the powerful electromagnetic radiation from the binary mergers has come to the gravisphere of the Earth at the speed of light. A powerful electromagnetic action on the Earth's gravisphere led to the formation of toroidal gravitational waves, which were recorded by sensors of gravitational waves. Therefore, it is not surprising that the measured velocity of "gravitation" exactly coincides with the speed of light.
One should always keep in mind that any experimental fact can be explained from several positions, and not only from the point of view of doctrinal physics. Unwillingness to discuss and ignore other explanations of the facts is the main problem of doctrinal physics. I propose to be tolerant of all explanations of the facts.
I'm working on a liquid metal contact system. See pictures below. Not only will this allow me to remove the onboard computer (a huge source of heat), but also remove the need to regularly charge an on-board battery. Planned now are 4 liquid metal connections for USB and 2 for main power. The design still maintains the option of going back to battery powered “flight” if test results turn out positive.Work was also done on designing a support for the main amplifier and phase change heat sink. These three parts will be 3D printed in the coming days.
Hello, your experiment progress is encouraging. Now, what is the microwave power of this device? What is the Q value of this resonator?
Quote from: oyzw on 03/20/2018 11:52 pmHello, your experiment progress is encouraging. Now, what is the microwave power of this device? What is the Q value of this resonator?Thank you. The main amplifier is capable of 25-30W, depending on frequency. The cavity resonator has a Q value of 8,000 - 16,000 at mode TE013, depending on how well it is tuned. The small spherical end-plate is manually aligned with the large spherical end-plate via the three adjusters seen in the image below - all while antenna impedance is manually controlled using the central knob tuner.
Quote from: Monomorphic on 03/21/2018 01:30 amQuote from: oyzw on 03/20/2018 11:52 pmHello, your experiment progress is encouraging. Now, what is the microwave power of this device? What is the Q value of this resonator?Thank you. The main amplifier is capable of 25-30W, depending on frequency. The cavity resonator has a Q value of 8,000 - 16,000 at mode TE013, depending on how well it is tuned. The small spherical end-plate is manually aligned with the large spherical end-plate via the three adjusters seen in the image below - all while antenna impedance is manually controlled using the central knob tuner.Excuse me, where do you live? I would like to give you the cavity and microwave amplifiers I made, and you can use him to carry out the high power and high Q cavity test.
Quote from: fvlad on 03/09/2018 12:40 pmWhen I processed the data and plotted the graph for 2 weeks of measurement, I realized that some neutrino matter is registered from the eastern quadrature of the Earth's orbit, obviously those detected by Michelson and Morley. You apparently don't have a clue what neutrinos are. They have no relation to the Michelson-Morley experiment, in fact the existence of neutrinos was not theorized or detected by any experiment until after Michelson and Morley were both dead for decades. They also would not have anything to do with your experiment. they barely interact with most matter at all, because they are uncharged and do not interact via electromagnetic force.
When I processed the data and plotted the graph for 2 weeks of measurement, I realized that some neutrino matter is registered from the eastern quadrature of the Earth's orbit, obviously those detected by Michelson and Morley.
Quote from: fvlad on 03/20/2018 06:44 am Quote from: meberbs on 03/11/2018 02:24 am Quote from: fvlad on 03/10/2018 12:13 pmOther questions have answers in my essays. No, actually they aren't answered there. Dear meberbs, In my essay https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2806 https://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/3080 there are answers to many questions. For example, you wrote about a very interesting for all question: the speed of propagation of gravitational waves. You truncated my post improperly. My post continued by pointing out that your papers are full of misuse of the words such as "neutrino" which is why your papers don't answer anything all of the statements in them are simply nonsensical. You do not actually address your misunderstanding of neutrinos at all in this post.
The fact of the motion of the medium of propagation of light at a speed of 8 km/s does not fit into doctrinal physics, so the negative result of the experiments of Michelson and Morley was announced.
Quote from: fvlad on 03/28/2018 12:22 pmThe fact of the motion of the medium of propagation of light at a speed of 8 km/s does not fit into doctrinal physics, so the negative result of the experiments of Michelson and Morley was announced. Of course, this is one interpretation of Miller's results. Another interpretation is that the 8 km/s has been shown to be experimental error and improper statistical analysis, by numerous experiments and data analyses since Miller's last observations in 1930. While Miller pioneered many experimental techniques, his data analysis has been shown to be incorrect, and without any further experimental evidence to the contrary, the null result is the accepted interpretation.
Dear meberbs, Yes indeed, during the experiments of Michelson and Morley there was no concept of neutrinos, and I did not say otherwise. But they found motion at a speed of 8 km/s of the luminiferous medium from the eastern quadrature of the Earth's orbit.
In another COBE experiment, motion of a medium propagating infrared radiation from the eastern quadrature of the orbit was also detected.
In both cases, motion of the medium was detected, in which electromagnetic waves propagate, which I called the neutrino medium. Let us read what a neutrino is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino_(disambiguation) «A neutrino is an elementary particle». https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino «The neutrino is so named because it is electrically neutral». «neutrinos typically pass through normal matter unimpeded and undetected». These generally accepted neutrino concepts are consistent with my assumptions about the medium of the physical vacuum, so I use them.
In my opinion, doctrinal physicists apparently do not have a clue what a neutrino is, if they write the following. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_neutrino «One open question of particle physics is whether or not neutrinos and anti-neutrinos are the same particle in which case it would be a Majorana fermion or whether they are different particles in which case they would be Dirac fermions. They are produced in beta decay and other types weak interactions».
I want to say that in science one must be objective, there should not be a blind faith in totalitarian and belligerent doctrine.
Mike McCullough's TEDx talk is finally on YT: He specifically mentions the EMDrive.
Quote from: VAXHeadroom on 03/29/2018 03:26 pmMike McCullough's TEDx talk is finally on YT: He specifically mentions the EMDrive.So.1) Takes visible, measurable phenomena and creates new theory.2) Theory explains visible (even sometimes exotic) phenomena in simple way.3) Theory generates predictions for behavior that can be proved either true or false.And it's got a (small) side order of unification between GR and the quantum world. Which looks to me the way physics should be done. I think he's right. I could never quite shake the felling that "Hunting Dark Matter" had a lot in common with that other mythic beast, the Snark. Now how you produce an acceleration of 1 x 10^20 m/s^2 is going to be tough. That's roughly 10 billion, billion g. That said I dimly recall RL Forwards ideas about countering gravity by accelerating very dense fluids at very high speeds. Maybe very dense particles (Tungsten? SG about 19) in some low viscosity liquid?
On a cosmological scale this motion would explain the absence of dark matter in a sparse galaxy as the density of fresh furrows is low. Dark matter, dark photons are all errors based on misunderstanding gravity as being a force, not an expression of probability a la mach effect and binary bifurcating paths at the planck resolution. Spacetime doesn't depend on quantum channels for any massive movement, but it preferentially enables electromagnetic attraction along the ray paths. This hypothesis of mutable and soft quantum channels can be disproven if equally massive galaxies contain less dark matter if they are the more luminous.
Given the object's large size and faint appearance, astronomers classify NGC 1052-DF2 as an ultra-diffuse galaxy. A 2015 survey of the Coma galaxy cluster showed these large, faint objects to be surprisingly common.But none of the ultra-diffuse galaxies discovered so far have been found to be lacking in dark matter.