Robert John Morton
The Universe
About Theories
Time & Space
Enigmatic Æther
Objects & Matter
Notion of Motion
Force & Inertia
Events & Waves
Red-Shift
Revolution
Nature of Light
Established View
The Prime Axiom
Simultaneity
Observer's Frame
Dilation of Time
Source's Frame
Velocity of Light
Doppler Effect
Wave or Particle?
[This paragraph should be placed in "Events and Waves" Essay.]
Velocity of Light: An object, not currently being subjected to a directed external force, is at rest with respect to the æther. Light is a localized polarization stress etched into the æther. Therefore, light travels at velocity c towards any body which is at rest with respect to the æther. Consequently, light travels at velocity c relative to any body not currently being acted upon by a directed external force. Conversely, light does not travel at velocity c relative to any body currently being acted upon (accelerated) by a directed external force.
By accelerating a charge instead of a mass. Dipole radio antenna.
Regarding the announcement on 10/02/2015 that two US laboratories had, in September 2015, detected gravity waves emanating from a pair of colliding black holes 1 billion light-years distant:
The observation is based upon the notion that a super-massive binary, such as twin neutron stars in close mutual orbit, are accelerating, due to their circular trajectories, and that consequently they must be radiating gravity waves.
First of all, in my understanding, bodies only emit radiation of any kind when they are accelerating relative to the æther. Binary bodies in close mutual orbit are not accelerating relative to the æther: they are at rest with respect to the æther.
Only if and when the bodies contact each other will they accelerate relative to the æther because the æther is accelerating past them into the centre of the composite object.
The two mutually perpendicular paths of laser light, which constitute the essence of the gravity wave detector, will suffer compressive and expansive perturbations in both space and time. Equally, so will any material or standing wave system used to measure such perturbations. Consequently, the perturbations will be fundamentally undetectable.
The said gravity waves, were they to exist, would have the nature of displacement waves, in that the mutually orbiting binary bodies would push space in the way that an agitator pushes water in a vertical-axis washing machine. This is analogous to an isothermal compression (which permits free flow) within a material liquid. Since the æther only manifests its existence to a forcibly accelerated body, isothermal movement cannot exist as a wave in the æther.
The ætherial compression waves I am describing in this essay are analogous to adiabatic compression, like sound waves, within a material fluid. Thus they are fundamentally different from the gravity waves of Einstein.
Both these are completely separate from electromagnetic radiation, which, in my perception, is the adiabatic transverse stressing of the positive and negative constituents of the neutral æther.
People think of what is travelling through space as an electromagnetic wave. But it is much more basic than this. It does not have to form a complete cycle that returns to its initial state. It simply needs to be a change of some kind. What is really being propagated is therefore simply a change in the configuration of (or the stress within) the fabric of space.
The configuration of stress within the fabric of space can be changed in many ways. Perhaps one of the simplest ways is as follows.
The fingures of God separate the positive and negative fibres of space into two parallel clusters. Equally, the fingures of Man can achieve the same thing by charging up a capacitor through effectively pulling electrons from the atoms on one of the capacitor's plates and forcibly locating them on the other plate. An electric field will then exist in the volume of space between the plates, as represented by the vertical green lines.
Let us assume that billions of years have passed and that all the space in the universe has relaxed under the effect of this configuration.
Suddenly, I rotate the capacitor in a plane perpendicular to the plane of the plates, as illustrated on the right. The electric field is now at right-angles to its original position. The rest of space does not adapt to this change instantly. The rest of space only becomes aware of this change in the field's orientation as the twist in the field propagates outwards at the speed of light. This change is not a change in the field's strength: only in its orientation.
My capacitor is a physical object. As such, it has mass. Mass bequeaths to my capacitor the property known as inertia. This, in addition to impeding any effort to move it linearly, also impedes any effort to rotate it. To rotate it, I therefore need to apply a torque to overcome its inertia and set it rotating. When it has nearly rotated through 90°, I need to apply a reverse torque to stop it rotating beyond the 90° through which I wish to rotate it.
This is not, however, the only torque I must apply in order to rotate my capacitor. This is because space itself has something that is kind of analogous to inertia. Space resists my effort to rotate the electric field that is between the plates of my charged capacitor. The faster I try to rotate the electric field, the more back-torque it presents to me. The energy I expend in overcoming this rotational electromagnetic inertia of space is carried away from me at the speed of light as a short 90° twist in the fabric of space, which expands in area as it goes.
flaccid fly-wheel.
a sinusoidal growth and decay from side-on.
Event Theory of Light: a change in in the amplitude or orientation of electric or magnetic flux is an event. Such a change is a feature etched onto the æther. The æther converges at the speed of light towards all the sink-holes in the universe. The event no longer has the form it had at its instant of cause. The essence of the event is now the feature etched onto the æther. The wave is the original object in changed form. Fundamentally, an event cannot take place without the rest of the universe sooner or later knowing about it.
As it happens, there are quite a few physical mechanisms that can suppress the acceleration of gravity and limit an object's rate of fall to a constant speed. The most familiar example is air. When an object falls through the air, it accelerates to its terminal velocity and then continues to fall at constant speed. Of course, as it gets nearer the ground, strictly speaking, the air becomes denser and the terminal velocity decreases. However, since, by analogy, free space is a uniform medium, I shall consider the air to be of uniform density.
The problem with air is that it is resistive. It resists the effort of the force of gravity to accelerate the object. Consequently, it dissipates energy. The passage of a electromagnetic disturbance through truly fee space is not dissipative. It does not resist the passage of the disturbance, it merely impedes it. Resistance dissipates energy: impedance does not. An example of a mechanism, which theoretically does not dissipate energy and which falls at constant velocity, is a little device known as a "slinky".
A slinkey is a flaccid coil of metal. It is famous for its ability to "walk" down stairs by gravity alone. It is placed like a vertical cylinder of coiled metal at the top of the stairs. Its top is then pushed towards the stairs so that it tips over and falls down to the first stair. It bends over and its top lands on the first stair. The rest of its coil then follows until it becomes a vertical cylinder again on the first stair down. Its horizontal momentum then causes its top to lean over towards the next stair down and the whole process repeats until it reaches the bottom of the stairs. It descends the stairs at constant speed solely under the influence of gravity.
The slinky is a mechanical device. Its operation is therefore necessarily resisted by friction. Consequently, it dissipates energy. Notwithstanding, friction is not the dominant factor that limits the terminal velocity with which the slinky descends the stairs. The dominant speed-limiting factor is the slinky's behaviour in which it turns its potential energy into kinetic energy and back again with each step. At the point when the slinky has the form of a vertical cylinder on a stair, all its energy is potential (static) energy. While it is half way through the process of descending downwards to the next step, its coil is shuttling at speed to the lower pile. The energy in the moving coil is kinetic energy (energy due to motion).
Continually transferring energy between its potential and kinetic form, on a cyclic basis, seems to impose a terminal velocity upon something that would otherwise continue to accelerate. There are many mechanisms that cyclically exchange energy between its kinetic and potential forms like a kind of game of throw and catch.
A good example of this kind of mechanism is the pendulum bob. This converts kinetic energy into potential energy and back again in an endless cycle as it swings. The potential energy of the bob at any given instant is the downward force f of gravity on the bob (measured in newtons) times the height (in metres) of the bob h above its minimum possible height (ie its height when the pendulum is vertical). The kinetic energy of the bob at any given instant is the inertial mass M of the pendulum bob (measured in kilograms) times half its swing-velocity v squared. The total energy E (potential + kinetic) of the swinging pendulum remains constant all the time such that:
Energy at any time, E [total] = fh [potential] + ½Mv2 [kinetic].
The force f on the pendulum bob is its mass M times the acceleration of gravity g. That is: f = Mg. So g is a constant that relates the inertial mass of an object to its gravitational weight on Earth.
The pendulum is also a physical mechanism that cannot be produced in practice without friction being present, which gradually dissipates the energy of its swing. The swing of a real pendulum therefore deteriorates fairly quickly until it finally reaches zero (the pendulum stops). To keep a physical pendulum swinging, therefore, it is necessary to keep it topped up with energy from an external source.
Traditionally, in pendulum clocks, this top-up energy is supplied by a large weight through a chain and pulley system. The weight is charged up with a large amount of potential energy by lifting it to the top of the chain close to the underside of the clock. The weight then supplies energy, to compensate for the friction air and bearings of the pendulum, by (effectively) falling very slowly.
Significantly, the weight falls at constant speed. It does not accelerate continually as it would if it were thrown off a cliff. Consequently, it appears that, the pendulum of the clock is a mechanism that turns acceleration into constant speed. This it does by shuttling its energy back and forth, between its potential and kinetic forms, in a continuous cycle.
The constant radial speed c, at which the expanding shell of an electromagnetic disturbance travels outwards, is similarly regulated by the cyclic transference of its energy from potential to kinetic and back again. With each cycle, however, it moves outwards a fixed distance. The amount of the distance moved each cycle depends on the period of the cycle. So it appears that there is a linkage or coupling between, on the one hand, the exchange of energy between potential and kinetic form and, on the other hand, a movement outwards or forwards in space.
Is there anything in the pendulum mechanism that is analogous to this forward motion in space? The weight, which compensates for the pendulum's inherent friction, drops a fixed amount each cycle of the pendulum. This, however, is not a part of the pendulum itself. It is not a part of the mechanism that swaps its energy cyclically between its potential and kinetic forms. For analogy with an electromagnetic disturbance in space it is necessary to consider a perfectly frictionless pendulum, which will swing indefinitely without loss of energy.
It is possible to construct a pendulum-type mechanism that produces a forward advancement through space. It is the gyro-pendulum.
When I was young, my parents bought me a toy gyro top. I was fascinated with the way it precessed in a circle when supported on a ball-support at only one end of its axis. Being a curious kid, I spun up the top with a string and then held the ends of its axis, one end in each hand, and forcibly rotated it. I could not understand why it insisted in forcing a twist perpendicular to the way I was trying to rotate it. When, by applying all my strength, I was able to rotate its axis the way I wanted, my effort appeared to drastically slow down the fly-wheel. There seemed to be a mysterious linkage of forces at work, which, to me, were counter-intuitive. It is this mysterious property of a rotating fly-wheel that enables the gyro-pendulum to move through space at right-angles to the plane in which it swings.
The gyro-pendulum has a fly-wheel instead of a bob. The fly-wheel's axis of rotation is in line with the pendulum rod. The fly-wheel has an integrated electric motor to keep it rotating at high speed. The gyro-pendulum's bearing and rod must be sufficiently robust to take the reaction of the fly-wheel motor's high torque. The fly-wheel itself should be dynamically balanced to minimize vibration.
If the gyro-pendulum is set swinging while the fly-wheel is not rotating, it will swing like a normal pendulum. If its swing is maintained by a weight mechanism to compensate for its inherent friction, it will continue to swing indefinitely. However, if the motor is now switched on and the fly-wheel spun up to speed, the pendulum will quickly stop swinging.
Some kind of force impedes the swing of the pendulum when the fly-wheel is spinning. To reveal more about this force, we now mount the gyro-pendulum assembly on a little 4-wheeled cart that runs on rails. The wheels and the rails run in a horizontal direction perpendicular to the plane in which the gyro-pendulum swings. Mounted on this free-wheeling cart, the pendulum now continues to swing, even with the fly-wheel rotating at high speed.
Significantly, as the gyro-pendulum swings back and forth, the cart moves along the rails a little way and then back again to where it started. The mysterious force is propelling the cart back and forth along the rails. If the cart is now held stationary, the pendulum is again forced to stop swinging. The force thus acts in a direction perpenducular to both the plane of the gyro-pendulum's swing and the plane of the fly-wheel's rotation. There is an unseen linkage between 1) the rotational motion of the fly-wheel's spin, 2) the rotational motion of the pendulum's swing and 3) the linear motion of the cart along the rails.
As best as I can remember, the first recognized public dæmonstration of this phenomenon was done, by an amateur inventor called Alex Jones, in a television science documentary shown in the United Kingdom around 1974.
Suppose I allow the gyro-pendulum to hang vertically downwards at rest. In other words, it is not swinging. Its fly-wheel, however, is kept rotating at constant speed by its integral motor. If I now push the cart, my effort is impeded by a reactionary force from the cart. This force is considerably greater than the cart's rolling friction. The force I apply somehow causes the gyro-pendulum to be pushed sideways and the fly-wheel motor feels a braking torque. The amounts of these effects seem to be proportional to the force I apply to the cart.
The linkage between the torque of the fly-wheel, the torque of the pendulum's swing, and the linear force along the rails, thus appears to be a two-way linkage. Rather than being a simple applied force like a rocket in space, it is a captured force like the engine and transmission of a car running along the road in a low gear. If the astronaught cuts the rocket motor, the space ship keeps on going at the speed to which the rocket had propelled it. If the motorist takes his foot off the accelerator pedal, the axle and gearbox pass the braking torque of the idling engine to the wheels, which causes the car to slow down rapidly. There seems to be a ghostly gearbox within the fabric of space, which links the gyro-pendulum to the force that pushes the cart.
A rocket motor simply applies a force to a spaceship. So long as its rocket motor keeps burning, the spaceship continues to accelerate indefinitely according to the formula: force = mass × acceleration. The speed of a car, on the other hand, is linked to the speed of the engine. Likewise, the speed with which the cart advances along the track is linked to the motion of the gyro-pendulum and its fly-wheel. The cart's speed is determined by the motion of the gyro-pendulum and not simply by the formula: force = mass × acceleration.
Being able to push a cart backwards and forwards over a short distance isn't very useful. What would be useful is a mechanism that could push a cart indefinitely in a single direction. The gyro-pendulum may be adapted to do this.
Suppose the gyro-pendulum's mechanism is modified to allow the pendulum to swing all the way to the upside-down vertical position and then go over the top and round full circle. The external weight mechanism is adjusted so that the swing velocity of the pendulum is almost zero as it passes the point where the fly-wheel is vertically above the main bearing.
The little cart should now go forward in short jerks, but always in the same direction. Although the speed of the cart varies over the cycle of the gyro-pendulum, the average speed over multiple cycles is constant so long as the weight and dimensions of the assembly don't change and and the fly-wheel speed is maintained.
If the motion of the cart be resisted - by, for example, little brakes on the cart's wheels - the fly-wheel motor and the swing of the pendulum feel corresponding braking torques. This causes the pendulum's swing velocity to decrease. The pendulum therefore no longer makes it all the way to the top vertical position and the fully-revolving cycle is broken to a mere to-and-fro swing. The only way to maintain a full over-the-top revolving cycle is to increase the pendulum's external driving weight.
In the ideal experimental version of this device, the cart wheels on the rails, the bearings of the pendulum and its fly-wheel and all other moving parts are frictionless. There is also no air resistance and the whole assembly is weighless. This completely rotating gyro-pendulum is thus a mechanism that, by continually shuttling its energy between the kinetic and potential state, advances through space (albeit in short jerks) at a constant average speed.
And this is what an electromagnetic disturbance does, although whether or not it moves in cyclic jerks, I wouldn't like to guess. Could the electromagnetic disturbance be using the same mysterious ghostly gearbox linkage between momentum, space and time as the gyro-pendulum on the cart? Which is the more fundamental: the gyroscopic effect or the propagation of the electromagnetic disturbance? Are they simply two views of the same thing?
Two gyro-pendulums are mounted in line, as shown on the left. In place of the external weight that kept the single gyro-pendulum swinging is a high-torque motor rotating the twin gyro-pendulum assembly in the original "plane of swing". The rotating fly-wheels are thus forced to revolve - in a plane at right angles to their planes of rotation - around the central bearing. Because it is being revolved continuously in the same direction instead of being swung back and forth, each fly-wheel produces a constant force along the axis of the assembly's main bearing. In order to produce a combined linear force in the same direction, the fly-wheels must be rotated by their integrated motors in opposite directions. The direction of the linear force may be reversed either by reversing the directions of spin of both fly-wheels, or by reversing the direction in which the fly-wheels are revolved about the axis of the main bearing.
The whole assembly is mounted on a more robust version of the 4-wheeled cart on rails. The cart is propelled along the rails by the created force. If the motion of the cart is resisted - for example by brakes on the cart's wheels - extra load will be transmitted to the 3 motora and they will consume more electrical power. In the operation of this device, the various axles and bearings - and indeed the 4 wheels on the rails - are providing static reactions to various torques. There is still an equal and opposite reaction to every force.
The next step is to mount another 4 wheels on the top of the cart and provide a pair of tracks above the cart for them to run along. This way, the cart is held in place by the tracks, no matter how it may be tipped or even inverted. The tracks are then moved to run vertically. The cart is constrained so that it can only move in the upward or downward directions. The force created by the revolving fly-wheels may then be made to act either upwards or downwards. If it is made to act upwards, with sufficient power fed to the motors to spin and revolve the fly-wheels fast enough, the fly-wheel assembly should levitate. But perhaps not.
One may think that by adding another twin fly-wheel assembly, with both the fly-whel directions of spin and revolution reversed, one may compensate for the torque reaction of the first assembly while maintaining a force in the same direction. Partial success would be possible but there would also remain uncompensated precessional forces. To make a free-flying levitation fly-wheel system is considerably more complicated but perhaps not impossible.
It would appear that, by means of the contraption described above, we have created a reactionless force. However, by careful thought, it can be clearly perceived that, strictly speaking, what our contraption produces is not a force.
Consider a mass in free space. If an external force is appled to it, it accelerates at a determinable rate according to the equation force = mass × acceleration. Now consider the same mass in free fall close to the Earth's surface, imagining that there is no air to slow it down. People attribute a force to the Earth's gravity. The quantitative value of that force is given by the equation force = mass × g. The symbol g is called the acceleration due to gravity. But these two situations are not the same. There is no external force on the mass when it is in free fall. This is why, rather than attribute a force to gravity, the Theory of Relativity attributes the effect to bent space-time.
Suppose the mass is spherical and made of jelly. An external force applied to it in free space will cause it to deform into a flattened ellipsoid. This is because the force is applied over a small area on one side of the mass and passed through the material of the mass to all its parts. Under free fall, the jelly maintains its spherical shape because there is no external force to deform it.
Consequently, what the fly-wheel assembly produces has more the nature of a gravitational field rather than it does a direct force. Whether the field produced be linear, radial, or divergent like the magnetic field around a coil carrying an electric current, I do not know.
In the television documentary I mentioned earlier, it was clearly dæmonstrated that revolving a rotating fly-wheel caused it apparently to lose weight. Of course, its mass remains the same. It does not lose mass. Clearly, the mechanism is not creating a force as such. So perhaps it is mearly straightening out - to a greater or lesser degree - the curvature of space-time caused by the Earth's mass. This could mean that, while the contraption may be able to reduce the weight of the moving fly-wheels to zero, it would not produce a resultant propulsive force, nor even reduce the weight of the contraption's static framework. If this be the case, the contraption could never actually levitate, let alone levitate a vehicle. It merely recreates the free-fall conditions of free space for the fly-wheels, well away from the influence of any other mass such as the Earth.
electric warp-drive; electron tracing a precessing circular path.
I shall consider the reciprocal of the permittivity of free space 1/ε0 to be analogous to the acceleration constant of gravity g in the context of the pendulum.
The magnetic inertia of space μ0 is analogous to the mass M of the pendulum bob (measured in kilograms) from which its kinetic energy is ½mv2. With a perfectly frictionless pendulum, the sum of the two energies mh + ½mv2 will be constant. The total energy of the pendulum will not change with time.
coriolis force
vector cross operator
length of pendulum = wavelength
speed of pendulum = frequency
