Horrace,
I have no issue with your math and understood perfectly how little
force anything raised to the -E14 represents. The issue is that any force is
there at all. It represents a tiny crack in the isotropy of gravity. I agree
that it is an inconsequential force between two plates. Their work however
did not consider atoms diffused between these same plates and the effect of
heat energy due to confinement on the radial acceleration of the orbitals as
the plate spacing approaches the limit of 3D approaching 2D. We know the
Casimir force increases inversely with the cube of the distance so if any of
these "small" hydrogen scenarios are correct then we get into a self
reducing mode where they could leverage that 1/ds^3 by squeezing into nooks
and crannies at least 137 times tighter than their normal radius :_)
I haven't replied to Mauro yet because I know I am going to fall into the
ether pit, relative motion of the "ether" through space was disproved by M&M
but yet the Casimir cavity appears to have a different ratio of short to
long flux compared to outside the cavity, they are spatially stationary to
each other yet have different gravitational field (albeit inconsequential).
this would mean the "ether" passes through the cavity slower than around it.
OK, so now I've said the E word!
Best Regards
Fran
-----Original Message-----
From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheff...@mtaonline.net]
Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 5:23 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:megalith levitation
On Oct 3, 2009, at 5:06 PM, Frank wrote:
> The spatial confinement combined with the equivalence boundary
> suggests the 10E-14 newtons of acceleration calculated by DiFiore
> et all is
> a vector wholly on the time axis -no trig portions of the spatial
> axis, the
> force was ignored as inconsequential but I suggest the confinement
> allows
> heat energy to contribute to the vector and without a relief valve of
> combustion could lead to a thermal runaway where H1 and H2 states
> oscillate
> by virtue of a Pd like opposition to diatomic formation but here in
> the
> cavity a high velocity version of this property that immediately
> tears apart
> H2 restoring monatomic energy levels.
Fran,
I had decided to leave you with your fantasies, but I just can't help
myself! I have to make one more try at getting some common sense
with regard to DiFiore at al.
The 10^-14 newtons is a *force*, not an acceleration.
DiFiore at all state: "... to increase the total force and obtain
macroscopic dimensions, Nl = 10^6 layers can be used, each having a
diameter of 35 cm, and thickness of 100 nm, for a total thickness of
about 10 cm."
This is a device of volume Pi * (35 cm/2)^2 * (10 cm) = 550 cm^3. It
is a device comprised of layers of SiO2 and aluminum. The combined
density is about 2.65 g/cm^3, so the weight is about (2.65 g/cm^3)*
(550 cm^3) = 1.46 kg.
If you ignore the much more massive power supply required, the
maximum acceleration that can be obtained is:
a = f/m = (10^-14 N)/(1.46 kg) = 6.8x10^-15 m/s^2
This is true no matter how big you build you engine. Suppose you
wanted to use such a 10^-14 newton device to provide thrust for a
modest 1000 kg space craft. We have:
a = f/m = (10^-14 N)/(1000 kg) = 10^-17 m/s^2
Acceleration does not have an exponential effect on velocity. It has
a linear effect on velocity. In fact, if we accelerate for t seconds
we obtain a velocity of:
v = a * t
Suppose we want to see how long it takes for the space craft to go
from 0 to 60 mph, to see what kind of hot rod we have. Think it can
do it in 10 seconds? Let's see:
t = v/a = (60 mph)/(10^-17 m/s^2)
= (96.5 km/h)/(10^-17 m/s^2)
= (26.8 m/s)/(10^-17 m/s^2)
= 2.68 x 10^18 seconds
= 8.49 x 10^10 years
which is older than the age of the known universe.
Hopefully I haven't made a simple mistake. Please check my work.
The acceleration provided by (10^-14 N)/(1.46 kg), i.e. 6.8x10^-15 m/
s^2, can not produce any practical effects. It cannot provide useful
velocities in a century, nor can it be engineered to provide useful
kinetic energy or forces. Applied to an atom, it certainly can not
provide enough energy in a lifetime to ionize the atom.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
