Member

The intention of this article to hypothesize a theory of electromagnetic propulsion of matter, using a pulsed electric current, located within a wire conductor, that induces a magnetic field, which then interacts with its own current to propel that conductor [Mass or matter] without a propellant. This function is a violation of Newton's third law. So in this scenario F x ma in one direction does not equal F x ma in the opposite direction.

The intention of this article is to describe an electromagnetic propulsion demonstration proof of concept model, which will propel itself without a propellant, furthermore in apparent violation of Newton's third Law.

The intention of this article is to describe a hypothetical experimental device for measuring the aberration of light consisting of a disk capable of rotation. In addition, the apparatus possesses a fixed central light source that emits a beam which reflects, when aligned and not rotating, off of a tangential y oriented peripheral retro-reflective mirror, whereby it returns back to the source and a fixed detector, the latter also located at the disk’s center. A retro-reflective mirror reflects light back to the source regardless of the angle of incidence of the incoming light beam, so compared to a normal mirror it is different. On one hand, in the non-rotating mode, from the reference frame of the mirror, moreover when aligned, the incident light beam is reflected normal to the mirror’s plane, consequently directly back to the source and detector. On the other hand, du ring rapid rotation, from the reference frame of the peripheral mirror, again when aligned, due to the phenomena of light aberration, the incident light beam will not be oriented perpendicular to the mirror’s plane. Rather it will be slanted at an angle, so it will not be reflected back to the either the source or detector. What is more, this article will take into consideration possible light source aberration as well. Assuming local light aberration can be detected, then the outcome can be indicative of a preferred frame for the speed of light other than the observer [Ether], or else the speed of light is relative to the source, both of which are inconsistent with Einstein’s SRT. However this concept does not invalidate SRT rather it is only an alternative interpretation. Nevertheless by using the concepts developed in this article, it will be shown how one could possibly invalidate SRT.

This paper postulates that the magnetic field of a permanent magnet is produced by multiple “solenoid like” superconducting circular electron currents, all oriented in the same direction [domains], analogous to the magnetic field induced by an electromagnet as well as the magnetic field produced by the Earth. Consequently the magnetic fields of a solenoid electromagnet, the Earth, and the domains of a permanent magnet are identical processes. Furthermore, since the dipole model of the electron is then no longer necessary for explaining the function of a permanent magnetic, this paper also posits a new model for the physical structure of the electron.

The purpose of the article is to relate an Ether Model with the formation of matter, the quantum nature of the matter and energy, the rest and relativistic inertial mass of the electron [matter], and finally matter's interaction with electromagnetic radiation.

The objective of the Article is to postulate that the physical shape of a free electron's magnetic field is not that of a dipole structure. In addition, this article will demonstrate a new model of the electron based upon an electron current within a metal conductor, what's more how this new model can be incorporated into quantum nature of matter and energy.

The objective of this article is to hypothesize a simple non-mathematical combined SRT/Inflowing Space Model [the later analogous to GRT] by means of three-dimensional spatial visualization. It is consistent with the majority of, nevertheless not all of the classical concepts and observations that are typically associated with Einstein?s theories. The major exceptions being that the preferred frame for the speed of light located far from any of the large masses of the universe is identical to the isotropy of the microwave background radiation, and the preferred frame for the local speed of light on the Earth?s surface is equivalent to the Earth Centered Non Rotating Inertial Fame/Earth?s gravitational field.

This article is an extension of the paper SRT, GRT and the Resurrection of the Ether [Part 1]. The intention of this document is to use the new unified theory to explain known observations and other assumed hypothetical consequences typically associated with Einstein?s Relativity

A single circular loop conductor [ring] with its current induces a magnetic field, not only surrounding the ring but also within the substance of the ring. Subsequently, that portion of the magnetic field, which is located within the body of the ring, interacts with its own current to produce Lorentz forces. Electromagnetic propulsive forces are produced from this process. However, these forces are either blocked by the intact structure of the ring, or they are symmetrically oriented in opposing directions. As such, these later forces counteract each other. Essentially, all the forces are balanced; consequently there is no propulsion of the ring. However, if a directed magnetic pulse [magnetic flux compression producers] distorts the magnetic field relative to one side of the plane of the ring, then for the duration of this pulse, there will be within the ring some Lorentz forces that are neither blocked by its physical structure nor an-nulled by opposing symmetrical forces. Accordingly, these forces are unbalanced. As a result, there will be electromagnetic propulsion of the ring along its axis.

The purpose of this paper is to utilize the concepts demonstrated in my prior papers: "Comments on General Relativity", "A New Theory of Special Relativity Based upon The Higgs Field", and "Flowing Space [An alternative to Einstein's GR]" to develop other consequences. Six new consequences are described:

1. Entrainment or Aether drag
2. The Speed of Light at The Earth's Surface and The Michelson Morley Experiment
3. Stellar Aberration
4. The Center of Mass, The Center of Gravity and How They Relate to The Flow of Space
5. The Arrow of Time
6. The 'Rate of Time' and The Earth Centered Inertial Non-rotating Frame.

In order to comprehend this paper and its concepts, one must first read and understand my previous papers. The present paper utilizes the Theory of Inflowing Space to hypothesize the other new consequences, and explain other known observations in both cosmology and physics. Based on this new hypothesis, we will then reinterpret other known concepts. If these revised explanations are easier to understand, as well tied together by a common underlying simple principle, then this new inflowing space theory may indeed represent reality.

With regards to the classic MM experiment and an assumed ether wind, this paper merely expresses a postulate?that within a given coordinate system, at a constant velocity, during 360 degrees of rotation, there are compensating anti-symmetrical changes in the number of wavelengths of light within each arm, which prevent the occurrence of any changing interference. However, the same MM experiment will demonstrate the ether wind, if performed at a constant velocity, within two separate coordinate systems, and then the interference patterns compared between these two frames [fringe shift].

This paper postulates that the Earth?s gravitational field /The Earth Centered Non-Rotating Inertial Frame/ Inflow of space is the preferred frame for both the speed of light as well as the ?tic rate? of atomic clocks. This paper further postulates that these two separate processes are not directly related to one another, but rather are indirectly related through a common separate reference frame, which is The Earth Centered Non- Rotating Inertial Frame. This new postulate assumes that The Rest Frame for the Velocity of light, The Earth Centered Inertial Non-Rotating Inertial Frame, and the Preferred Frame for the ?Rate of Time? are identical. For simplicity of explanation, this paper will be divided into three sections. Part 1 will describe, [1]The Rest Frame for the Velocity of light, [2] The Earth Centered Inertial Non-Rotating Inertial Frame, and [3] The Preferred Frame for the ?Rate of Time, and will postulate that they are identical. Part 2 will relate this new postulate to a famous ?rate of time? experiment performed by Joseph Hafade and Richard Keating using atomic clocks. Part 3 will describe how the speed of light and the ? tic rate ? of atomic clocks relate to each other within the Earth Centered Non-Rotating Inertial Fame.

The new theory of Special Relativity based upon the Higgs field has the following attributes: 1) There are different reference frames for objects in motion. Some objects are at rest with the flow or expansion of space [galaxies]. Other objects have a high speed relative to the flow of space [galactic jets]. 2) The theory hypothesizes that the Higgs field determines the ?value of mass? and the ?rate of time? for particles [objects] 3) The value of the Higgs field can be different for objects in those different reference frames. Thus, the ?value of mass? and the ?rate of time? can also be different for objects in those different reference frames. 4) The differences in the ?rates of time? and ?values of mass? for the particles [objects] in their different reference frames is then used to explain the same proven facts or proven observations as demonstrated by Einstein?s Theory of Special Relativity.

This papers is aka "New Theory of Special Relativity based upon the Higgs Field"

The new theory of flowing space asserts that:

1. The Universe expands by the creation of new space, possibly from another dimension. This causes some of the objects of the universe to recede from one other with inertial motion (geodesic motion).
2. Other objects of the universe move towards each other with the same type inertial or geodesic motion. Why then is space not disappearing [through matter] and returning to wherever it came from?
3. In this new theory, matter moves towards other matter not because space is curved but rather because space flows towards matter and disappears [through matter] as it moves into another dimension. This concept would be another symmetry of physics.
4. This idea is a new way of perceiving the concept of curved space-time. Space-time flows into the universe between the super-clusters of galaxies from another dimension. It then flows towards matter, then through matter and subsequently out of the universe and returns to wherever it came from. This new concept is then used to explain known observations and proven facts in both Special Relativity and General Relativity.

Originally presented as two papers:

On General Relativity

Why are gravity and inertia equivalent, and why are gravitational mass and inertial mass equal? This paper argues for the following answers:

1. When an object ?falls? to Earth, it is in a geodesic path. This is inertial or weightless motion. There is no force pulling this object to Earth.
2. When the ?falling? object hits the Earth, its inertial path is blocked which accelerates it away from the Earth relative to its geodesic path but not relative to the Earth?s surface. This process compacts the object [from its acceleration and its interaction with the Higgs field]. This is similar to the concept of inertia [compaction of inertia] as when an object is accelerated in outer space far from any large mass.
3. An object ?sitting? on the surface of the Earth is also accelerated away from Earth [compaction]. If magically a small portion of the Earth disappeared beneath this object, then the object would resume its geodesic path towards the Earth?s center. The blockage of the inertial path of the object towards the Earth?s center is covariant acceleration away from Earth. If no force is pulling this object to the Earth?s center and if the object is not in inertial motion ---- it is in accelerated motion away from Earth (compaction of gravity).

The purpose of this paper is to utilize the concepts demonstrated in my papers on General Relativity, Special Relativity and Flowing Space to hypothesize other consequences. Eight consequences are described:

1. The function of a Ferris wheel is discussed.
2. Large rotating astronomical objects are discussed.
3. A gyroscope's function is discussed.
4. The weight of a non-rotating gyroscope versus a rotating gyroscope is discussed.
5. Galileo's experiment of the equality of the ?falling? of a heavy object and a light object is discussed.
6. Gravity and gravitational field are described as two separate entities.
7. The diamagnetic levitation of a frog is discussed.
8. The terminology of physics is discussed.