Questioning the Foundations of Physics to Achieve Interstellar Travel. By Benjamin T Solomon

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Questioning the Foundations of Physics to Achieve Interstellar Travel. By Benjamin T Solomon"

Dorcas Matthews
5 years ago
Views:

1 Questioning the Foundations of Physics to Achieve Interstellar Travel By Benjamin T Solomon iseti LLC PO Box 8532 Denver, CO Tel: benjamin.t.solomon@iseti.us Abstract: This essay looks at the author s research and compares it with contemporary physics to ask more questions. What is a force? Why do we need to travel? Why can t we just arrive? Is interstellar travel achievable? Does subspace exists? Is contemporary physics looking for answers in the wrong places? Brief Bio: Solomon recently completed a 12-year study into the theoretical and technological feasibility of gravity modification. He is the author of An Introduction to Gravity Modification, Universal Publishers, 520 pages, January Solomon has published several related papers, at peer reviewed SPESIF conferences and in Physics Essays.

2 Questioning the Foundations of Physics to Achieve Interstellar Travel By Benjamin T Solomon It is not sufficient to just challenge the foundations of physics just for the theoretical interest. To make the challenge come alive we need a goal that will keep us awake at night at the possibility of new unthinkable inventions that will take man where no man has gone before. Is interstellar travel possible? I have found that in trying to answer this question, I am forced to challenge the foundations of physics. This question provides a vessel to discuss how to challenge, and if we have found some of the answers, there are still more questions. The two most important questions in my opinion are, what is force?, and what is the difference between travel and arrival? That is, why do we need to travel, why can t we just arrive? I started questioning the foundations of physics in In attempting to answer the question, what is force?, in 2007 I discovered a new formula for gravitational acceleration g=τc 2 that does not require us to know the mass of the planet or star. τ is the change in time dilation divided by the change in distance. This is an immense discovery, never before accomplished in the 346- year history, since Newton, of the physics of gravitational fields, as all theories on gravity require us to know the mass of the planet or star. Gerard t Hooft the 1999 Nobel Laureate showed in 2008 that gravitational forces can be present in space even where planets and stars are not. My work goes a step further. We can determine the acceleration present in space without any knowledge of the planets or stars that cause this gravitational field (Solomon, 2011). Unlike Newtonian gravity or General Relativity, the importance of the shape of spacetime lies in the fact that it informs us of what time dilation and length contraction are, as these two parameters are the minimum information one requires to determine gravitational acceleration. Therefore, the formalism in this essay will be different from that of Newtonian gravity or General Relativity, as a tensor treatment is outside the scope of this paper. A schema is an outline of a model of a complex reality to assist in explaining this reality. The work of various researchers in the gravity field can be presented by a conceptual formalism referred to as source-field-effect schema. The source-field-effect schema corresponds to the mass-gravity-acceleration phenomenon, respectively. Puthoff s (Amoroso et al, 2002) source-field schema describes how the mass source could create a gravitational field; how General Relativity s curved spacetime could be produced by the polarizability of vacuum in the vicinity of a mass. Rueda & Haisch (Amoroso et al, 2002) source schema is about mass only. They discuss inertia mass, mass as a field and Higgs boson as the origin of mass.

3 Bondi (1957) suggested the possibility of a field schema not requiring mass. Bondi made two observations when reviewing gravitation as a theory and suggested that mass may not be critical to a theory of gravitation. First, as long as relativity is considered purely as a theory of gravitation, the inertial and passive gravitational masses do not in fact appear. This is consistent with the fact that gravitational acceleration (but not force) is independent of the mass of the object being accelerated. His second observation was that active gravitational mass occurs for the first time as a constant of integration in Schwarzschild s solution suggesting the possibility that this constant of integration could have other experimentally untested interpretations. One could conjecture that mass is a proxy for number of quarks and therefore a proxy for quark interaction as the source of gravitational fields. Bondi did not explicitly say it, but maybe one should look into other mechanisms for gravitational field sources. Hooft (2008) takes another step in Bondi s direction with his source-field schema. He states that the absence of matter no longer guarantees local flatness that the absence of mass does not guarantee that acceleration will not be present. In effect the field is being disengaged from its source. Wagoner (1998) describes a local-field schema, how a gravitational field emerges from a local analysis leading to a broad class of metric theories. Solomon s (2009) schema proposed a different local analysis, one where local field distortions in spacetime lead to a local particle distortions, and alter the shape of the particle causing the center of mass of the particle to shift. This shifting is seen as acceleration g and is governed by g = τc 2, where τ is the change in time dilation divided by the change in distance across this particle; thereby providing a mathematical solution to Hooft s (2008) assertion that absence of matter no longer guarantees local flatness. General Relativity is based on separation vector. However, splitting this separation vector equation into two equations, one part of the separation vector equation is a function of mass and the other part a tensor function. This gives rise to the question, can the mass part be replaced by something else say, an Ω function, where Ω is as yet undefined but not a function of mass? Now one realizes that the theoretical physics community has focused on the tensor part to the complete exclusion of the Ω function. That is, there is definitely the opportunity to question the foundations of physics. Looking at the massless equation for gravitational acceleration, change in time dilation divided by the change in distance is what describes a gravitational field. A small body orbiting the Earth has a certain velocity which can be converted to time dilation. Change the orbital radius of the small body by a small amount, less or more, gives a new orbital velocity and a new time dilation. Therefore, divide this change in time dilation by the change in height and multiply by the velocity of light squared, give the acceleration present. The same is with a centripetal motion. Use the velocity along the radius at any two points, determine the change in time

4 dilation then divide this change in time dilation by the change in radius and multiply by the velocity of light squared, give the acceleration present The same is true for an electron traveling in a magnetic field, but this cannot be explained without the use of equations. See Solomon 2001 for a detailed explanation. Further, this approach now explains why force is orthogonal to both electron motion and magnetic field. Contemporary electromagnetism cannot explain why other than stating it has to be a vector cross product. Which raise the question, what is the electron doing in the magnetic field? Is it rotating with respect to the magnetic field or is it locked? It is important to note that the time dilation as a spatial gradient is the key to acceleration and is termed Non Inertia or Ni Field. The Ni field concept is the first major challenge to quantum mechanics in a hundred years. Quantum mechanics states that force is transmitted by the exchange of virtual particles, whereas the Ni field states that it is the spatial gradient of time dilation. Unlike quantum mechanics, the Ni field is able to unify gravity, electromagnetism and mechanical forces. So there, we have a new physics that challenges the foundations of contemporary theories, with alternative mechanisms that need to be tested further and experimentally verified. Is it possible to design a test that will either prove or disprove that virtual particles are the carrier of force. We have an alternate hypothesis, Ni fields. Therefore, a test could be developed that considers the difference between these two approaches. Currently it does not make sense to test relativity and quantum mechanics as alternate hypothesis, because they are so very different. However, inserting a third alternative, Ni fields, could provide a means of developing test for relativity with the Ni field as an alternate hypothesis. Could we test this Ni field approach on a problem where all other physicist-engineers 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 a=ω r ω s h produces weight loss and gain. 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. Further work is required to figure out how such an Ω function could be fully developed into a theoretical model.

5 The next step in challenging the foundations of physics is to replace the mass based Ω function with an electromagnetic function. Currently the work to unify electromagnetism with gravity is focused on the tensor side. This essay, however, suggest that this may not be the case. If we can do this 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. But gravity modification is not the means for interstellar travel. 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? More interestingly, can we alter the probability of arrivals in the single slit experiments? There are other questions we can ask, why is the Doppler Effect not a special case of Gravitational Red/Blue shift? 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?

6 Technical Foot Notes: 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).

An Introduction to Gravity Modification

An Introduction to Gravity Modification An Introduction to Gravity Modification: A Guide to Using Laithwaite s and Podkletnov s Experiments and the Physics of Forces for Empirical Results Second Edition