Category Archives: Experimental Testing

I have partially completed my work on the photon probability distribution being a modified Gamma distribution and not a Gaussian distribution. To this end I have been testing microwave, light & subwavelength models using this modified Gamma distribution.

The subwavelength modified Gamma model provides a reasonably close fit with R. F. Oulton, V. J. Sorger, D. A. Genov, D. F. P. Pile and X. Zhang paper A hybrid plasmonic waveguide for subwavelength confinement and long-range propagation. The fit is close but note that there are areas where the models disagree.

nanowireSource: Nature Photonics

Figure 1: GaAs nano wire in SiO2 on a metallic plane (100nm<d<500nm, 2nm<h<100nm)

The Oulton et al paper shows the energy distribution for d=200nm & h=100nm, Figure 2.

Qd200h100nmSource: Nature Photonics

Figure 2: Energy distribution (d=200nm, h=100nm)

My model shows a similar result, Figure 3.

Ed200h100nm

Figure 3: Modified Gamma model (d=200nm, h=100nm)

The Oulton et al paper shows the energy distribution for d=200nm & h=100nm, Figure 4.

Qd200h002nmSource: Nature Photonics

Figure 4: Energy distribution (d=200nm, h=2nm)

My model shows a similar result, Figure 5.

Ed200h002nm

Figure 5: Modified Gamma model (d=200nm, h=2nm)

The energy in the gap area for Oulton et al model is 15% for h=2nm & up to 20% for h-100nm. The modified Gamma model’s energy in the gap area is about 10% and 15% respectively, about 5% consistently less than Outlon et al. However, the modified Gamma model is sensitive to the dimensions of the SiO2 layer, and I have assumed this to be 800nm across and 400 nm high.

I think this is a great fit for subwavelength, coming out of nowhere, while at the same time giving good assurances at the microwave and optical frequencies.

If you know what the internal dimensions of the WR 430 microwave waveguide are, do contact me and let me know.

Ben Solomon

I’ll be presenting a 1st draft of my findings at the International Space Development Conference 2009, May 28, 4:00pm. Here is the schedule link http://www.nss.org/isdc/ISDC_2009_Program_Agenda_Web.pdf

Summary of Findings:
1. The photon probability distribution is not a Gaussian distribution.
2. Further enhancements for quantum entanglement experiments.
3. A new model for shielding, cloaking/stealth & invisibility that presents all three as different forms of the same phenomenon.
4. Two new material design strategies.

For those of you who are interested, this would be a great opportunity to meet face-to-face and explore collaboration and/or funding, and let me know in advance.

Benjamin T Solomon
iSETI LLC (Interstellar Space Exploration Technology Initiative)
P.O. Box 831
Evergreen, CO 80437
benjamin . t . solomon AT iseti . us

Progress (1):
I have used my numerical modeling expertise to derive a formula for gravitational acceleration that does not have mass in the formula, g=tau.c^2, where tau is the ratio of the change in time dilation to the change in distance.

Progress (2):
In the process I discovered non-inertia, Ni, fields, a shared property of gravitational, mechanical and electromagnetic forces.

Progress (3):
That work also showed that gravitational acceleration is independent of the internal structure of a particle, i.e. need not be quantum, string or anything else – gravity does not care.

Progress (4):
Therefore, I sought to find out what was the true probability distribution of a photon. Well, it is not a Gaussian distribution. It is a modified Gamma distribution.

The first three finding have been published as an American Institute of Physics Conference Proceeding, 2009.

Collaboration Sought:
I have almost completed developing elegantly simple photon behavior based on modified Gamma probability distribution that is not related to quantum theory. I’m looking for practitioners (scientist or engineers) who will collaborate with me to prove or disprove these formulae.  They need to have free access to lab, materials and their own sources of funding.

Example Testing:
(1) Quantum entanglement- there are additional restrictions that need to be tested.
(2) Shielding – There is a method to reducing the shielding effectiveness.
(3) Cloaking – This is a little more difficult but I think that cloaking is not the same as invisibility.

Please do contact me if you are interested in the possibility of collaboration. In particular I am interested in talking to materials manufactures who could, if we are successful, manufacture very light weight radiation shielding materials for future space exploration, etc.

I need to have some background info and how you would like to collaborate.

If there are enough responses I will set up a collaboration group on LinkedIn or Google Groups