FOR A NEW FORM OF INDIRECT SOLAR ENERGY. THE NEW UNIVERSAL ATTRACTION AND NEW ELECTROMAGNETISM : 2.2.1 Can the inertial mass be reduced at low (non-relativistic) speeds below the rest-mass? Linear inertia. The flow of time and the frequency of the matter.

The question of decreasing the inertia of a body at rest below its usual rest mass, seems to be equivalent to the question of reducing the gravitational mass, of the body, at rest. At this the old ideas of inertia of Ernst Mach or Mach's principle about inertial mass ( "mass out there influences inertia here" see e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach%27s_principle ) , that had impressed a lot A. Einstein do apply! Except that we substitute "mass out there" with "gravitational field from mass out there" . If we succeed to reduce drastically all possible effects of surrounding gravitational fields to a massive body this may be equivalent to reducing drastically its inertial mass!

As we shall see, next paragraphs and post, this can be done, by decreasing the gravitation of a body due to its mass (which would be equivalent to less gravitational mass). And to reduce the gravitation of a body due to its mass, can be done by isolating the flow of aether heat around the body, so that it gravitates less or almost it does not gravitate at all. The relation of the flow of aether heat and gravitation will be discussed in the paragraphs and posts below.

(See also a very simple experiment by Bruce DePalma here http://depalma.pair.com/gyrodrop.html and also by H. Aspden gyroscope effect http://www.gyroscopes.org.uk/papers/Anti-Gravity%20Electronics.pdf )

By frequency of an amount of matter, we mean here, the Compton-De Broglie frequency of the electrons of the matter.

In other words, the frequency of the light wave, that will be derived if we annihilate the electron, and convert it to light. (The De-Broglie, material aether wave of the electron is here the light wave).

(See e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compton_wavelength and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matter_wave#Electrons , and the formula from the above links of such a frequency for a moving electron is

(2.4.1)

$\begin{align}&\lambda = \frac {h}{\gamma m_0v} = \frac {h}{m_0v} \sqrt{1 - \frac{v^2}{c^2}}\\ & f = \frac{\gamma\,m_0c^2}{h} = \frac {m_0c^2}{h\sqrt{1 - \frac{v^2}{c^2}}} \end{align}$

Conversely (for u=0)

(2.4.2)

c^2=f*h/m0

(that is the speed of light depends on the frequency of the matter)

where m0 is the rest mass of the electron and , u its velocity. For u=0, we get the frequency of the matter.

We notice that the frequency of the matter (electrons) is monotonously increasing by the speed of light, and conversely.

Now modern physics assumes, that the speed of light is always constant, therefore the frequency of the matter (in rest) is always constant. Conversely, if the frequency of the matter (electrons) is constant so will be the speed of light.

But neither the frequency of matter, neither the speed of light is constant!

We will understand why in later posts, when we analyse the nature of the Universal attraction. E.g. the infrared solar radiation, may increase the potential energy of the gravitational field (or in other words the aether temperature, which also makes time flow slower, exactly as with material clocks that go slower when their temperature rises) which will result in to higher speed of light, and therefore higher frequency of the particles of matter.

For mechanical cocks, but also biological clocks, THE FREQUENCY OF THE MATTER (OR THE TEMPERATURE OF AETHER) DEFINES THE SPEED OF THE FLOW OF TIME .

The higher the frequency the slower the flow of the time, and conversely.

From the formula of the frequency of the electron, we notice also, that

1) For high speeds of a body, the frequency is higher, therefore the flow of time is slower (the well known relativistic twins paradox)

2) For a body at rest, and with constant rest mass, when the (Compton-De Broglie) frequency of its matter increases (due to local increase of the speed of light), then also the flow of time is slower ( an unknown so far effect).

(Also the spin 1/2 of e.g. an electron is constant only as far as the speed of light is constant! If the speed of light increases in a particle at rest, so will the spin-momentum, and the frequency of the spin of the particle, when the rest mass is constant.)

This idea to utilize the Compton-De Broglie frequency as time measurements has been explored by Holger Muller in the University of Berkeley.

(see http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2013/01/10/a-rock-is-a-clock-physicist-uses-matter-to-tell-time/ )

We mentioned that the relativistic formulas are more-or-less correct, inspite the fact the the speed of light is not really constant or the same in all frame of reference.

You may ask of course how is this possible? Has it not been experimentally proved? In fact not! The E=mc^2 that it has been widely tested, as we mentioned, it can be derived in a different way, even if the speed of light changes. And the Michelson-Morley experiment as we mentioned means something else than what Einsteined assumed it means.

The week point here of all the above relativistic formulas (even if we assume a changing speed of light) are the Lorentz transformations themselves. As we mentioned the D'Alambert linear wave equation, is invariant in the Lorentz transformations. And it is well known too that the Maxwell's equations of electromagnetism are also invariant in the Lorents tranformations, as well as the linear wave equation of electromagnetic waves. But we do know that due to the quantization of light waves (E=hν) , the energy (amplitude) does depend on the frequency, therefore the real wave equation of light is non-linear. And we discuss in subsequent paragraphs, that the weak point of the Maxwell equations is that they are linear, while many experiments and "free energy" devices indicate, that the true equations of the electromagnetic field (electromagntised aether) should be non-linear. Therefore the true non-linear equations will not be invariant to the Lorents transformations. And most probably the true equation of eather-sound (compression wave) is not the linear D' Alambert equation but a non-linear wave equations. Which also means that the true dependence of the Compton-De Broglie frequancy of matter on the velocity of the particle is not really the formula 2.4.1, that are derived from the relativistic formulas. Rarely in flow dynamics the equations are linear. Therefore the above relativistic equations, might be almost excatly correct for relatively uniform motions of matter, inside the aether, that creates a smooth flow of aether. This is the limit of the above equations.

The frequency of matter, is the true base of the dependence of the speed of the flow of time. It has nothing in reality to do with any principle of relativity, or any constraint that nothing goes faster than light. But it has all to do with the FREQUENCY OF THE MATERIAL BODY. Now the frequency e.g. of the human material body, DOES DEPEND ON THE HUMAN CONSCIOUSNESS, quality of habitual thinking, and emotions like love etc.

Better quality thoughts, and emotions (like love) increase the aether temperature, and thus the speed of light, locally in the human body, therefore, from the last formulas of Compton-De Broglie, also increase the frequency of the matter in the body, and therefore make slower the flow of time, and WE LIVE LONGER! (exactly like the twin paradox of special relativity, except it can be at rest, and no need to move close to the speed of light).

(for a very interesting talk by D. Wilcock with an abundance of experimental facts and scientific articles supporting partly the above see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOA6XFrGMW8 )

In post 2.7 , we will discuss in more details, what is the nature of Newtonian universal attraction

that gives the inverse square law of planetary attractions. There we will discover, that the aether temperature is proportional to the scalar Newtonian gravitational potential.

(2.7.3) φ=λT

And therefore exactly as with the speed c of sound in air, where its speed is proportional (almost equal) to the average speed of the particles of air, therefore depending on the temperature in air (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_sound ) , so is with aether too .

(2.4.3) $c_{\mathrm{ideal}} = \sqrt{\gamma \cdot {p \over \rho}} = \sqrt{\gamma \cdot R \cdot T \over M}= \sqrt{\gamma \cdot k \cdot T \over m}\,$

where

c_ideal is the speed of sound in an ideal gas;
R (approximately 8.314463 J·K⁻¹·mol⁻¹) is the molar gas constant (universal gas constant);^[12]
k is the Boltzmann constant;
γ (gamma) is the adiabatic index. At room temperature, where thermal energy is fully partitioned into rotation (rotations are fully excited) but quantum effects prevent excitation of vibrational modes, the value is 7/5 = 1.400 for diatomic molecules, according to kinetic theory. Gamma is actually experimentally measured over a range from 1.3991 to 1.403 at 0 °C, for air. Gamma is exactly 5/3 = 1.6667 for monatomic gases such as noble gases and it is 8/6 = 1.3333 for triatomic molecule gases that, like H2O, are not co-linear (a co-linear triatomic gas such as CO2 is equivalent to a diatomic gas for our purposes here);
T is the absolute temperature;
M is the molar mass of the gas. The mean molar mass for dry air is about 0.028,964,5 kg/mol;^{[citation needed]}
n is the number of moles;
m is the mass of a single molecule.

And thus we may state (after post 2.7) an equation of dependence of the square of the speed of light, on the scalar gravitational potential φ

(2.4.4) c^2=α*φ

where α is an appropriate constant with appropriate units.

And here is where the Einstein gravitation is wrong, in spite its alleged assertions that the speed of light is always in all systems constant.

Of course the changes of the speed of light are slight, as the curving of the path of the light, is

slight. Einsteins predicts the curving of the speed of light, but not the change of the value of the speed of light. A photon traveling towards the sun, is slightly accelerating (and if not vertically, then also its ray-path is curved) and a photon traveling away from the sun is slightly, decelerating. So there are tangential and centripetal acceleration on the photon.

On the other hand neither Newtonian gravitation is entirely correct. Newtonian gravitation is only the static gravitation, while there is no difference of any dynamic gravitation a with Einsteins gravitation. In Newtonian gravitation , all the (static) gravitation is created due to the presence of matter. But the correct is that the static gravitation, is created by the ether (field-gas) heat, and ether heat is certainly created by the presence of matter. But aether heat can also be created, by the absorption of eather (field-gas) of infrared solar radiation e.g. at the frequency of 1 Terra Herz. Therefore large material spherical shells of diameter of more than 50 Km, floating in space , say between earth and the sun, would absorb solar radiation at infrared, and the aether inside them would too, creating a "green house" effect, thus raising the aether temperature inside them, which by the formula 2.7.3 above would be creating higher scalar gravitational potential φ, which results in to increased (static) gravitation as if the ball was compact and full of matter. This of course is n no way predictable, by the Newtonian gravitation. But I believe it is not predictable either by the Einstein's gravitation,because it does not seem to be a way to incorporate the energy of the aether heat, in the energy-momentum tensor of the Einsteins gravitation. Besides, even if there was a way, Einstein's gravitation seem to be based on the cosntany of the speed of light which is wrong concept and physical fact.

Let us now go back to the experiments about if the motion of matter creates a motion in aether (aether-drag) or not.

It would not be a surprise if further experiments will prove that THE AETHER-DRAG OR AETHER NON-DRAG FORCE or types and measures of partial aether-drag (according to sufficient sophisticated theories of interaction of aether and matter, that include not only the planet but the sun too) DEPENDS ALSO ON THE FREQUENCY OF THE PRESENT MATTER close to the experimental devices, as well as the frequency of the permanent particles of aether itself. (And by frequency we mean the Compton-De Broglie frequency which is directly related with the frequency of the spin of the electrons, protons, and neutrons or aether particles) (something considered constant for particles at rest in quantum mechanics). And matter present close to the experimental device may include the frequency of the body of the human experimenter too. (Not all human beings of all civilisations and all times, that perform such experiments have the same body (3^rd density and 4th density matter) frequency or frequency of surrounding used material objects.) And I would not be surprised either if experiments would prove that some human beings have the ability just with their minds and conscious decision, to change the frequency of their bodies and even to move directly aether close to them.

Needless to say, that it is not only the aether-drag that may depend on the above Compton-De Broglie frequency of spin of the prontons, electrons and neutrons, but also the absolute value of the speed of light in aether. For example the constants μ0 ε0 of electromagnetism may depend on the above frequency, which gives that the magnetic field created (as the swirl of the charged aether) by a moving electron (Biot-Savart law) will change as the Compton-De Broglie frequency of the electron increases or decreases, and so will be the speed of light too.

This is direct from the well known relation of the speed of light with the dielectric and magnetization constants

(2.4.2)

c^2=1/(ε0μ0)

(see also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biot%E2%80%93Savart_law )

It is reported from alien civilizations, (many reports that can be found in the web) that when a humanoid body is from an Oxygen-breathing biosphere, then because they have high frequency of mind and body, they can stand traveling with vehicles up to 4 times the speed of light, as their practice prove. While if they are from Hydrogen-breathing biospheres they can stand to speeds only lower than the speed of light. These are hard facts for them, and

IT IS RIDICULOUS TO BELIEVE IN THEORIES LIKE SPECIAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY, ABOUT THE ABSOLUTE UPPER BOUND OF TRAVELLING SPEEDS BY THE SPEED OF LIGHT, WHEN THERE ARE SUCH ABUNDANT REPORTED FACTS FOR THE OPPOSITE.

Saturday, September 15, 2012

2.2.1 Can the inertial mass be reduced at low (non-relativistic) speeds below the rest-mass? Linear inertia. The flow of time and the frequency of the matter.