Questioning the Foundations of Physics to Achieve Interstellar Travel: Part 3

Part 2 Here

Need For New Experiments To Test Quantum Mechanics & Relativity
We now have a new physics, without adding additional dimensions, that challenge the foundations of contemporary theories. Note very carefully, this is not about the ability of quantum mechanics or relativity to provide exact answers. That they do extremely well. With Ni fields, can we test for which is better or best?

A better nomenclature is a ‘single-structure test’, a test to validate the structure proposed by a hypothesis or theory. For example, Mercury’s precession is an excellent single-structure test for relativity, but it does not say how this compares to say, quantum gravity. On the other hand, a ‘dual-structure’ test would compare any two different competing theories. The recent three photon observation would be an example of a dual-structure test. Relativity requires that spacetime is smooth and continuous but quantum gravity requires spacetime to be “comprised of discrete, invisibly small building blocks”. This three photon observation showed that spacetime was smooth and continuous down to distances smaller than predicted by quantum gravity. Therefore, suggesting that both quantum foam and quantum gravity maybe in part or whole invalidated, while upholding relativity.

Therefore, the new tests would authenticate or invalidate Ni fields as opposed to quantum mechanics or relativity. That is, it is about testing for structure or principles not for exactness. Of course both competing theories must first pass the single-structure test for exactness, before they can be considered for a dual-structure test.

Is it possible to design a single-structure test that will either prove or disprove that virtual particles are the carrier of force? Up to today that I know of, this test has not been done. Maybe this is not possible. Things are different now. We have an alternate hypothesis, Ni fields, that force is expressed by the spatial gradient of time dilation. These are two very different principles. A dual-structure test could be developed that considers these differences.

Except for the three photon observation, it does not make sense to conduct a dual-structure test on relativity versus quantum mechanics as alternate hypotheses, because they operate in different domains, galactic versus Planck distances. Inserting a third alternative, Ni fields, could provide a means of developing more dual-structure tests for relativity and quantum mechanics with the Ni field as an alternate hypothesis.

Could we conduct a single-structure test on Ni fields? On a problem where all other physicist-engineers (i.e. quantum mechanics, relativity or classical) have failed to solve? Prof. Eric Laithwaite’s Big Wheel experiment would be such a problem. Until now no one has solved it. Not with classical mechanics, quantum mechanics, relativity or string theories. The Big Wheel experiment is basically this. Pivot a wheel to the end of a 3-ft (1 m) rod. Spin this wheel to 3,000 rpm or more. Then rotate this rod with the spinning wheel at the other end. The technical description is, rotate the spin vector.

It turns out that the solution to the Big Wheel experiment is that acceleration a=ωrωs√h is governed by the rotation ωr, spin ωs, and the physical structure √h, and produces weight loss and gain. This is the second big win for Ni fields. The first is the unification of gravitational, electromagnetic and mechanical forces.

How interesting. We have a mechanical construction that does not change its mass, but is able to produce force. If the spin and rotation are of like sense to the observer, the force is toward the observer. If unlike then the force is away from the observer. Going back to the Ω function, we note that in the Ω function, mass has been replaced by spin and rotation, and more importantly the change in the rotation and spin appears to be equivalent to a change in mass. Further work is required to develop an Ω function into a theoretical model.

The next step in challenging the foundations of physics is to replace the mass based Ω function with an electromagnetic function. The contemporary work to unify electromagnetism with gravity is focused on the tensor side. This essay, however, suggests that this may not be the case. If we can do this – which we should be able to do, as Ni fields explain electron motion in a magnetic field – the new physics will enable us to use electrical circuits to create force, and will one day replace all combustion engines.

Imagine getting to Mars in 2 hours.

The How Of Interstellar Travel
But gravity modification is not the means for interstellar travel because mass cannot be accelerated past the velocity of light. To develop interstellar propulsion technology requires thinking outside the box. One possibility is, how do we ‘arrive’ without ‘travelling’. Surprisingly, Nature shows us that this is possible. Both photons and particles with mass (electrons, protons & neutrons) have probabilistic natures. If these particles pass through a slit they ‘arrive’ at either sides of the slit, not just straight ahead! This ‘arrival’ is governed by probabilities. Therefore, interstellar travel technology requires an understanding of how probability is implemented in Nature, and we need to figure out how to control the ‘arrival’ event, somewhat like the Hitch Hiker’s Guide to the Galaxy’s ‘infinite improbability drive’.

Neither relativity nor quantum mechanics can or has attempted to explain probabilities. So what is probability? And, in the single slit experiment why does it decrease as one moves orthogonally away from the slit? I proposed that probabilities are a property of subspace and the way to interstellar travel. Subspace co-exists with spacetime but does not have the time dimension. So how do we test for subspace? If it is associated with probability, then can we determine tests that can confirm subspace? I have suggested one in my book. More interestingly, for starters, can we alter the probability of arrivals in the single slit experiments?

To challenge the foundations of pshyics, there are other questions we can ask. Why is the Doppler Effect not a special case of Gravitational Red/Blue shift? Why is the Hubble parameter not a constant? Can we find the answers? Will seeking these answers keep us awake at night at the possibility of new unthinkable inventions that will take man where no man has gone before?

References
R.L. Amoroso, G. Hunter, M. Kafatos, and Vigier, Gravitation and Cosmology: From the Hubble Radius to the Plank Scale, Proceedings of a Symposium in Honour of the 80th Birthday of Jean-Pierre Vigier, Edited by Amoroso, R.L., Hunter, G., Kafatos, M., and Vigier, J-P., (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, USA, 2002).

H. Bondi, Reviews of Modern Physics, 29-3, 423 (1957). G. Hooft, Found Phys 38, 733 (2008).

B.T. Solomon, “An Approach to Gravity Modification as a Propulsion Technology”, Space, Propulsion and Energy Sciences International Forum (SPESIF 2009), edited by Glen Robertson, AIP Conference Proceedings, 1103, 317 (2009).

B.T. Solomon, Phys. Essays 24, 327 (2011)

R. V. Wagoner, 26th SLAC Summer Institute on Particle Physics, SSI 98, 1 (1998).

—————————————————————————————————

Benjamin T Solomon is the author & principal investigator of the 12-year study into the theoretical & technological feasibility of gravitation modification, titled An Introduction to Gravity Modification, to achieve interstellar travel in our lifetimes. For more information visit iSETI LLC, Interstellar Space Exploration Technology Initiative.

Solomon is inviting all serious participants to his LinkedIn Group Interstellar Travel & Gravity Modification.

Advertisements

About Benjamin Solomon
Ben Solomon is a Committee Member of the Nuclear and Future Flight Propulsion Technical Committee, American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics (AIAA), and author of An Introduction to Gravity Modification and Super Physics for Super Technologies: Replacing Bohr, Heisenberg, Schrödinger & Einstein (with Kindle Version)

5 Responses to Questioning the Foundations of Physics to Achieve Interstellar Travel: Part 3

  1. Pingback: Questioning the Foundations of Physics to Achieve Interstellar Travel: Part 2 « iSETI

  2. Pingback: The Kline Directive: Technological Feasibility (2c) . . . continued « iSETI

  3. tonyon says:

    …need hyperluminal SPEED and TIME of the Immortals (3D Bioprinting…Telomerase…) to conquer SPACE… ((typewrite: interstellar travel constant acceleration))

  4. tonyon says:

    …interstellar travel (Alpha Centauri C: 1g)… passengers climb in the space-elevator to the ship…awaits them in the asteroid Toutatis, which long ago placed in geostationary orbit… Day 1: zero-speed…distance = 40.68 Billion kms (4.068*10¹³)…total time travel = 1490 days (4 years and 1 month)… THE SHIP TAKEOFF►… 354 days to 1 G (9.8 mts/sec²) of CONSTANT ACCELERATION (weightlessness solved the problem), the ship with its powerful Antimatter rocket engines working tirelessly…antigravity fields generator run forwards working, and no collisions with anything…the ship reaches light-speed and…disappears…to enter into “superluminal dimension”…and still traveling at superluminal-speed > 1c… Day 745 (2 years and 15 days): the ship reaches the halfway…maximum superluminal-speed = 2.1c…”ladies and gentlemen please belts, for a few minutes while the motors are Off will be in weightlessness during the maneuver”…the ship rotates 180º around its “vertical” axis (perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of momentum)…On engines again and…◄starts to brake… Day 1136: the ship slows light-speed and…appears…descends again to the “subluminal dimension”… 354 days more decelerating and the ship is at zero-speed, the passenger disembarks at destination, a planet of Alpha Centauri C.

  5. tonyon says:

    …interstellar travel (thousands G of constant acceleration)… gravitation, dimensions and inertia: the Matter… The electromagnetic radiation: quanta (pieces) of energy in discrete amounts (minimum and independents), photons, which move in waves… why energy quanta (photons) are attracted by the gravitational fields of “stellar lenses” curving its trajectory and move on?…go ahead because they have inertia…and are attracted because the Energy also has Gravitation, but does not manifest because it no emits Graviton, or emit in imperceptible degree, because it has to be condensed enough like in matter for that, but it is sensible to Gravitation from Matter emits… Energy and Gravitation “associated”…and…the Gravitational Force is another manifestation, unknown yet, from the Energy…(no “curvature” of that called “space-time” relativistic)…beyond any exorbitant density/temperature of the Energy…Gravity (→attraction←)…becomes Antigravity (←repulsion→…Big-Bang!!…its particle exchange, the theoretical Graviton yet…maybe “quanta of gravitational energy”… The Energy (e=mc²) is sensitive to Gravitation but hardly emits Graviton… The Matter, which is condensed Energy (m=e/c²), emits now Gravitons proportionally to its density… The Matter with normal density, naturally, emits few Gravitons (weak intensity of gravitational force). But…if someday could transform some of matter, not in Energy by annihilation with antimatter but entirely in Gravitational Force with an exponential emission of Gravitons…would have a way to amplify the Gravitational Force a certain amount of mass…gravitational transformers…for spacecrafts to thousands G of constant acceleration…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: