Author Topic: Some questions about the White-Joday interferometer and related work  (Read 1529 times)

Hello!

i've been looking into the White-Juday interferometer [4] and attempting to evaluate it against neutron interferometry experimentation. The Collela-Overhauser-Werner experiments going back to the mid 70's [1] suggest that this is a more promising avenue to measure warp effects. What's the rationale behind the choice of laser-based interferometry versus neutron-based interferometry? Is it just the ease of obtaining lasers over neutron sources?

Another aspect of the White-Juday interferometer experiments that attracts my attention is this. The ambient mass, from the mass of the laboratory apparatus to the earth and the sun, will contribute a dominating warping effect. Wouldn't it require a lock-in amplifier [2] to detect any warping contribution from an energy field, such as the electric field in the proposed experiments?

Finally, there's a methodological aspect of the White-Juday proposals that is curious to me. It would seem at least plausible to posit a very small but detectable warp signature, work out the metric associated with that warp signature, plug that into the EFE's and derive the corresponding stress-energy tensor. From there it should be possible to work out mathematically -- before attempting any experimentation -- whether any energy field we can generate within the tabletop experimental parameters can meet the requirements of the resulting stress-energy tensor -- even with lock-in amplification.

In short, the idea is to follow the method used by Alcubierre [3]: work out a metric that has the characteristics of interest; plug that into the field equations; then solve for the stress-energy tensor and investigate that from the point of view of feasibility. In this case we are not looking to create a warp signature that will result in FTL, but simply one that is detectable using interferometry. Why not use this approach before committing dollars to experimental apparatus?

Best wishes,

--greg
Lucius Gregory Meredith, Managing Partner, Biosimilarity

[1] http://arxiv.org/pdf/1210.0005.pdf
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lock-in_amplifier
[3] http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0009013
[4] http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20110015936.pdf
« Last Edit: 06/22/2015 11:52 pm by leithaus »

Offline Stormbringer

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1340
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 92
It is my understanding that Dr. White and his team ceased using the White-Juday interferometer in favor of a more sensitive interferometer for subsequent tests even after getting suggestive (but too low sigma to be sure enough to publish for peer review) results.
When antigravity is outlawed only outlaws will have antigravity.

Thanks, Stormbringer! Do you have a reference or link for that development?

i hope you or others might be able to address the other aspects of my questions, or put me in touch with someone who can.

Offline Stormbringer

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1340
  • Liked: 239
  • Likes Given: 92
Not easily retrievable; but it was stated by white in one of his presentations at one or more of the conferences about a year or so ago. you could look up White's presentation video. Also I think it may have been mentioned in either this thread or this threads predecessor on this forum but unless Mr March said it independantly that would be a reference to one of White's presentation videos again.
When antigravity is outlawed only outlaws will have antigravity.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1