Speaking of a possible fifth force, or at least an antigravity property
for the electron, this thread would be lacking without mention of
"hypocharge" as defined by Fred Sparber.
BTW - wrt semantics issue - if the the Nobel committee was correct in
1979, when the award was given for the weak and electromagnetic forces
being "unified" by Salam, Glashow and Weinberg -- then two of the
formerly four fundamental interactions of nature are already now one. It
is likely that electron antigravity, if it is real, is also unified
within one of the remaining three, so that by adding a fifth, the result
is now three.
Strange things have often been noted after adding a fifth.
Hypocharge is interesting in the context of dimensionality, in that it
involves time. Hypocharge comes about due to the Time Dilation Effect of
the Displacement Current in Quark "String Circles"
I = C* dV/dT where C is the capacitance 2(pi)r/eo, r = k q^2/quark
energy, about 3 Fermi and the Permittivity of space, eo = 8.85E-12
farad/meter.
Coulomb force between two charges at one meter separation=
k*q1*q2/R^2 = 2.302E-28 nt
Gravitational force = 6.67E-11 m1*m2/R^2,
Electrons 5.5E-71 nt,
Quarks (1/3 mass of Proton) 2.04E-65 nt
Time dilation (Td) for "Hypocharge" Gravitational Force, (Fes/Fg)^!/2
Electrons = 2.05E21
Quarks = 3.36E18
Hypocharge = 1.6E-19/Td
Electron Hypocharge = 7.8E-41 Coulombs (Q1)
Quark Hypocharge = 4.77E-38 Coulombs (Q2)
Quark Mass = 1.66E-27/3 = 5.5E-28 kg
Number of Quarks making up the earth = 5.98E24/5.5E-28 = 1.08E52
The attractive Hypocharge "gravity" force of a quark (charge Q) at the
earth's surface and all of the earth's "quark mass"/Hypocharge=
k * Q^2 * 1.08E52/(Earth Radius) ^2 = 5.4E-27 nt
A positron should exert an attractive gravity-hypocharge force on the
proton.
A leap of faith suggests that electrons are repelled by the gravity
force. Now Mills came to this conclusion through a different route, but
if his experiment is replicated, then if will be interesting to see if
unification continues all the way to ...err... unity.
Because positrons and electrons make up positronium (Ps) and because the
Dirac epo field is composted of 'virtual Ps', and is also a dimensional
construct, one is left with the vague apprehension that all of the
forces will be unified when dimensionality is factored in.
Jones Beene wrote:
Few things in science are as contentious, or as unpredictable as the
"weather"; but during an electrical storm, many vorticians have
witnessed and thought about how and what --- "in the weather" could end
up being the possible pathway to a viable alternative energy source.
Is the so-called "fifth force" part of that emerging pathway, and is ZPE
itself related to this hypothetical force? And/or is a fifth power-law
also at work, or even related to the fifth force, perhaps in an inverse
way?
Few expert opinions are as consistently inaccurate as those coming from
scientists who claim to be meteorologists... and now to add to the
discord, Randy Mills of BLP is tossing a live grenade into that large
body of contentious opinion (being passed-off as firm science).
Here is the 'Fifth Force' paper, alluded to in earlier posts:
http://www.blacklightpower.com/theory/theorypapers/F%5E2%20102307web3.pdf
For some reason which I cannot quite verbalize yet, there is added
insight to be had by considering this paper in the context of Horace
Heffner's ideas of "virtual photons" (the messenger graviton) being the
mediator of gravity. More on that later.
http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/FullGravimag.pdf
There are a few-fair-facts regarding weather, which are in general
agreement and provide a ground-level foundation on which to build an
alternative energy scheme: first- the earth-ionosphere cavity- which is
a gigantic natural capacitor, and is sometimes referred to as the "fair
weather field" (FWF).
This 10 km thick zone of atmosphere has a charge potential of up to
500,000 volts, with the earth being the virtual cathode. Near the
surface, the voltage gradient is said to be a whopping, but nearly
unnoticed ~100 volts mer meter. The Earth has a net negative charge of
about a million coulombs, which is not really much, from a square meter
perspective. The upper atmosphere has a roughly equal and opposite
charge, so that the Earth as a whole is roughly neutral, or slightly net
negative.
At elevations above the clouds, atmospheric electricity is layered into
charge bands, and forms an "electrosphere" in which the Earth is
surrounded. The electrosphere layer begins above 10 km, and has such a
high electrical conductivity that the near constant electric potential
of the alternating layers is mystery. All of the layers are ionized by
solar and cosmic radiation, but solar UV is by far the strongest component.
The "fair weather field" (FWF) is also an observation that the surface
of the Earth has an excess of electrons, and that an absolutely neutral
'ground' is a bit of a misnomer. As to what dynamic interplay of deep
earth physics can supply an excess of electrons over 4 billion years,
well... that is a whole new Pandora's box, so to speak.
The photoelectric effect is said to be the proximate cause of freeing
electrons from matter (fair weather = more UV = more free electrons) and
traditionally, the dynamics of what makes the electrons "migrate"
upwards has been based solely on water vapor. That was the "expert"
opinion prior to Mills.
In his "Fifth Force" paper, R. Mills of BLP says however the electron
itself is anti-gravitational. He does not go into detail about all the
repercussions of this, but needless to say, one of the biggest wrt "the
weather" could be the "role reversal": that free electrons in the FWF
carry water vapor up, and not vice versa.
Given the opportunity, according to Mills, the 'hyperbolic' electron
would accelerate away from the earth's gravitational field at a very
high rate:
a = 5.96 x 10^13 m/sec^2.
This does not happen due to immediate interaction of electrons with
surrounding matter, but there is a net migration upwards over time.
If this rate of acceleration could be enhance only slightly, then net
excess energy could be cohered, at the expense of gravity presumably.
BTW Dr. John E. Connett (skeptic of RM) calculates that applied over a
1-sec time interval, the electron would/should be moving away from the
earth at a velocity of 5.96 x 10^13 m/sec. The speed of light is 2.99 x
10^8, so of course the electron must gain mass due to relativistic
effects. Taking this into account, after 1/10 of a second, JEC computes
that, in a vacuum the electron would be moving upward at a speed of
99.9999999 % of the speed of light, and would have a mass of 20,000
times its rest mass. And of course an unbelievably huge kinetic energy.
Well, rather than look at Connett's derisive view of Mills' fifth force
as bitter lemons, perhaps we should look at it as 'lemonade' and
determine how to harness that charge migration - if Mills should be
proven correct (as his experiment suggests) and JEC's math, but not his
interpretation of it, is also correct.
The obvious way to harness this effect (given the caveats) is to (first)
find out what keeps electrons from rapidly moving away in the first
place (and undoubtedly this involves the Dirac epo field) and then to
modulate that factor.
Looking back through the vortex archives, there are plenty of postings
from Fred Sparber on how to pull-off a type of FWF energy source
involving static or Van de Graff effects, but Fred was not benefiting
from Mills' insight, nor was a particular experiment available then.
Of course, if RM is wrong about the fifth force antigravity effect ,
then all of this word salad becomes indigestible ;-). That should go
without saying, but there are so many open questions in physics which
are elegantly answered by the hypothesis, that it deserves to be
extended even further than Mills himself has taken it.
My immediate personal agenda for this taking this approach, and giving
RM the benefit of the doubt is to eventually explain the Stiffler "SEC"
zone as being a modulation of the Dirac epo field which permits FWF
electrons (free electrons) to gain some of that aforementioned
fifth-force acceleration (and mass gain). Attempted replication and
proof of the Stiffler results is ongoing, and the final word has not yet
surfaced, but again, like the situation with Mills, it can be looked at
(by skeptics) as either a 'house of cards' or alternatively as: getting
a jump on the 'next big thing' in physics.
Jones
BTW - not to assume that any reader has been following this argument
close enough to realize that the "fifth" power law has not yet been
expounded upon... that may happen later, but Frank Grimer set the ground
work (literally if clay=ground) in an older posting:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00733.html
