Experimental Physics: 2 hours to the moon

Professionally researched theories... strings, branes, & LQG

Moderator: BenTheMan

Experimental Physics: 2 hours to the moon

Postby vladperrier » October 4th, 2012, 5:54 am

It all started with a trivial thing. I burned out a fuse. Usually one would just throw the old fuse away and replace it with a new one. However, I wanted to know the speed of electrons when the fuse burned out. I pictured that if the electrons crept up slowly, the wire conductor was cold. When the electrons sped up, the current increased and blew the fuse. After my calculations, it appeared that electrons moved faster than the speed of light. That couldn’t be! This little scenario gave birth to my creative doubt.

The mind of a scientist compares and associates many disconnected facts. In the process, a certain picture of a phenomenon may be born. This picture can be faulty, but it can also be true. Until all the pieces of a puzzle are put together, one can’t see the picture. So I started to work on my puzzle.

If electrons are not the conductors of electric current, then what are? According to the physics textbooks, an atom consists of a nucleus and electrons. Is it possible that the nucleus itself conducts electric current? Perhaps it oscillates inside of an atom and thus produces current? In pursuit of answers to these questions, my scientific quest began.

Any electrical phenomenon or device can be translated into its mechanical analogue. For instance, in electricity there is a transformer, which converts electrical energy. In mechanics, there is a reduction gear. In essence, these are identical things. There is also an oscillatory circuit and there is its mechanical counterpart – the resonant pendulum. In electricity, one deals with current and voltage; in mechanics - with speed and turning point.

When studying electrical engineering at the University, I was amazed by the electric current’s capacity to shift current and voltage in relation to one another (with introduction of reactive elements such as capacitance and inductance). I couldn’t seem to find a mechanical counterpart to this phenomenon, though. For instance, we have the source of voltage (constant speed rotating gear), we fed through the capacitance chain (connected to the gear through a resonant system), and the current shifted in relation to voltage at 90 degrees (rotation force lagged behind rotation speed at 90 degrees). This didn’t make any sense.

One can assemble the following toy: Take a coin (preferably with a maximum diameter, like a 25-cent coin) and stuff it into a balloon. Inflate the balloon and, with ordered oscillations, make the coin rotate inside. According to the textbooks, current is the ordinary oscillation of charged particles (it doesn’t specify which particles). In my understanding, electrical current is just like these balloons (atoms) lined one after another with the oscillating coins (nuclei) inside. I think that through this analogy, though not explicitly, one can find the explanation for current and voltage shift. Let’s assume that an electron is a point. It has one and only one degree of freedom. Hence, it can have only one variable of its energy shift, i.e., its speed. Then the nucleus is a particle; it can have six degrees of freedom and it is able to provide two independent variables. For instance, voltage is the value of nucleus deviation from the center of an atom, and then current is the rotation speed of a nucleus. (But again, let me repeat: these are my speculations only).

There are several experiments and phenomena in physics, which cannot be explained under the assumption that electrical current involves oscillations of electrons. However, if we assume that electrical current is oscillations of nuclei, some logical explanation can be attained. Let us look at some of these phenomena in more detail.

1. Measuring the mass of electrons can be a futile activity. It has been attempted in the following manner: One took quite large samples of various metals and made a capacitor out of them. Each plate was put on the different arms of a scale and adjusted until both scale arms held exactly the same weight. Then the plates were charged relative to each other using a source of electric current. In a way, electrons from one plate were stuffed into the other plate. Theoretically, after this activity, the plates had to change weight by the value of shifted electrons; in reality, the weight of these plates remained the same.

2. If one takes an electric coil, inserts it into a lathe, turns the coil vigorously and stops abruptly, electric current will flow through the coil.
3. During any transient electric processes, an impulse occurs. For instance, during reversal of the transformer core, buzzing occurs. During welding, when electrodes touch the work surface, current transmitting cables jerk. This jerking movement cannot be predicted, it can occur in any direction.
4. There is still no explanation for a piezoelectric effect – when the mechanical energy of compression transforms into electric power, and vice versa.

After all these experiments and speculations, I decided to explain my theory to people who understand a thing or two about physics. Here are just a couple of stories.
First I went to a public school to talk to a physics teacher and briefly explained my understanding of electric current. “Here, read this!” he barked, throwing at me a physics textbook for grade 9. Later he cooled down and we even attempted to run some tests at the school lab, but those were not successful. Another person I approached taught at the Technical University, and back in his day had developed electromagnetic pumps for liquid magnesium. His reaction was far more interesting, for he told me a story. “Long time ago, in medieval times, there was a scientist who, like a raving madman, kept claiming an absurd thing. He insisted that it wasn’t the sun that revolved around the earth, but instead it was the earth that revolved around the sun. They burned the weirdo. For the Bible said that the earth was the center of creation. So before speaking of anything, think about how others might perceive it.”

Further on, I conducted more experiments to test my theory. I moved the atom nucleus inside of the atom using external magnetic fields and gradually made my experiments more complicated. Allow me to provide more details regarding my experiments.

The device, which recorded the anti-gravity or support-free movement effect, consists of four-channel complex signal generator, and produces several synchronized signals. These signals are first sent to the current amplifiers and then to the device itself. The device is a steel ball, wounded by electric coils at different angles and directions. When electric signals are fed to the ball, its weight alters, but its mass remains the same (which was recorded by the scales). The device has been modernized several times, and currently is still in the development stage.

The main premise of all the experiments is that magnetic field is not a vector but rather a volumetrical figure. Consequently, when given its technical characteristics and capabilities, one can transform this figure. The transformation is done through a generator and depends on the change in produced signals.

The difficulty I’m facing right now lies in the fact that I haven’t been able to classify my discovery: I could be working with the antigravity device, or with the support-free engine. In any case, we deal with an electric machine, which efficiency index is capable of reaching 100% (even though right now it is at 0.003%).

How might our life change if this device does reach its potential? For instance, if I indeed reached the anti-gravity effect, we have a device capable of transforming electric energy into anti-gravity at the cost of a car generator. In the future, people can wear this kind of device as a backpack, turn it on, and move in space at the speed of 300 km/hour. This is how the problem of overpopulation can be solved. Furthermore, this discovery can lead to revolutionizing the transportation industry. For instance, helicopter speed is 400 km/hour and its efficiency index is 3%; when using my device, helicopter speed can be increased to 600 km/hour and its efficiency to 35%. Just like an automobile forever changed how we move on the ground, this device can forever change how we move in space.

If I, indeed, were able to create a support-free engine, then we can move all the advantages mentioned above into outer-space. Obviously, there is no gravity in space, so no one can be certain the device will work there. However, we are still getting much closer to the solar system development at significantly lower costs.
Humans discover and experience the world while systematizing a number of seemingly disconnected and non-related facts. One can experience the world based on somebody’s theory; or one can create his own. And others will use it to build their worldview. We are doing the latter.
Posts: 1
Joined: September 29th, 2012, 12:29 am

Return to Beyond the Standard Model

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users