Crowbar
Harmless
Posts: 13
Registered: 13-3-2009
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Evidence for equivalence principle violation in chirality experiments?
Came across this:
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm
Searching for a refutation, as the claim of EP violation is extraordinary. Doesn't seem to be crackpot, and the guy's an actual chemist. Asking for
opinions by those in the know here.
|
|
|
Polverone
Now celebrating 21 years of madness
Posts: 3186
Registered: 19-5-2002
Location: The Sunny Pacific Northwest
Member Is Offline
Mood: Waiting for spring
|
|
I may not have read the page closely enough, but I think it only proposes experiments. I did not see claims of experimental violations of the
equivalence principle.
The author is famous Usenet-contributor "Uncle Al," who is indeed a chemist (or at least plays a good imitation of one). I don't think he is a
crackpot, but he's a bit outside the normal orbit of industrial or academic chemistry. He has no shortage of ambitious ideas. I remember him
discussing this chiral mass experiment years ago on Usenet. Another famous project of his was to synthesize kilogram diamond crystals in a secret
super-corrosive solvent system. As far as I can tell he has mindblowing ideas in spades but I haven't seen any comparably amazing inventions or
peer-reviewed publications.
PGP Key and corresponding e-mail address
|
|
|
Vogelzang
Banned
Posts: 662
Registered: 26-4-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Its hard to read, but looks like it somehow correlates the motion of the earth and some chemical reactions. You might be interested in this:
http://allais.maurice.free.fr/English/index.htm
http://allais.maurice.free.fr/English/Science.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Allais
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allais_effect
[Edited on 3-2-2010 by Vogelzang]
|
|
|
turd
National Hazard
Posts: 800
Registered: 5-3-2006
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Polverone  | | The author is famous Usenet-contributor "Uncle Al," who is indeed a chemist (or at least plays a good imitation of one). I don't think he is a
crackpot, but he's a bit outside the normal orbit of industrial or academic chemistry. |
He always seemed a little bit crazy, but this text is either a joke or plain and simply crackpot insanity. There's no point being euphemistic about
it. It's an incoherent, non-sequitorial sequence of sentences, many of them true but devoid of any interesting information. The only useful
information I got from this text is that someone discovered chiral space groups. BTW, it's probably easier to make the experiment with one clockwise
and one counter-clockwise magnetic stirrer, but how is this supposed to prove or disprove the "chirality of vacuum"? The only entity to know the
answer is probably the Pu atom in Archimedes' head... 
|
|
|
franklyn
International Hazard
Posts: 3026
Registered: 30-5-2006
Location: Da Big Apple
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Equivalence is the unavoidable assumption if mass derived gravity
is experimentally undistinguishable from acceleration.
Should an exception prove to be validated it means back to the
drawing board, general relativity is flawed.
See - " Tests of the strong equivalence principle " here _
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_force
The preponderance of preference for right handedness in all things
remains unexplained. Most notably are nucleic acids, very few left
handed varieties are known and those from exceedingly rare primitive
single cell organisms. At another level why should there be more
right handed people than left handed. Parity? what parity, particles
are created as a pair , matter / antimatter , so where are all the
antiparticles hiding ?
.
|
|
|
manimal
Hazard to Others
Posts: 180
Registered: 15-1-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: ain't even mad
|
|
I wouldn't say flawed per se, more like incomplete. Indeed, GR is already thought to be incomplete due to the failure to incorporate it into a quantum
field theory. In that case, it would be 'flawed' in the same same sense that Newtonian mechanics is flawed. It's merely a good approximation under
constrained conditions. That the equivalence principle has been verified to many orders of magnitude to one doesn't necessarily suggest to me that
some divergence isn't impossible to manifest at extremely high energy levels or what have you.
Having said that, I wish to reaffirm my stance as a traditionalist for the most part. I don't think there could be any blatant violations under such
weak-tea conditions as those under consideration.
|
|
|
pantone159
National Hazard
Posts: 586
Registered: 27-6-2006
Location: Austin, TX, USA
Member Is Online
Mood: desperate for shade
|
|
I don't think that GR has any room whatsoever for violation of EP... The basis of the theory (as I understand it), is that the 'force of gravity' *IS*
acceleration, namely acceleration away from the free-fall world line, that due to the curvature of space falls towards the center of the earth. When I
am sitting in my chair in front of my computer, I am (according to GR), accelerating upwards away from the free-fall world line, so there isn't
actually any force of gravity, just curvature of space time.
|
|
|
manimal
Hazard to Others
Posts: 180
Registered: 15-1-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: ain't even mad
|
|
Well, if we are to accept the completeness of natural laws in general, that means coupling GR to some kind of quantum field theory (e.g. scalar fields
and particle interactions). It would be unwarranted to say that inertial mass and gravitational mass (which in theory should be explained by
the exchange of quanta between fermions) are equivalent in every sense absent a more general theory of quantum gravity. Consider matter under extreme
conditions where the effects of both GR and QM are expected to be large, like inside a black hole. No one at this time can really say with certainty
how matter will behave under such circumstances, and which field interactions will become relevant.
In fact, I believe string theory is expected to violate EQ in some capacity.
|
|
|
pantone159
National Hazard
Posts: 586
Registered: 27-6-2006
Location: Austin, TX, USA
Member Is Online
Mood: desperate for shade
|
|
Yeah, I guess I am just thinking of GR in non-QM terms. I suppose it is hard to say what changes in a quantum mechanical theory of gravity, as nobody
has figured it out yet!
|
|
|
Vogelzang
Banned
Posts: 662
Registered: 26-4-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
The inertial and gravitational equivalency of mass is grandiose double talk which appears to be designed to support Einstein's dodge of the logic
behind the twin paradox. Supposedly the twin in the space ship is accelerated at one point just enough to have him undergo a time dilation due to
acceleration to compensate for the time dilation due to velocity. I found the translation of Einstein's 1918 article on Wikipedia which was later
deleted. Here's the copy I saved:
http://sciliterature.50webs.com/Dialog_about_objections_agai...
See what Al Kelly says here about it: http://www.cartesio-episteme.net/quest.htm 
[Edited on 6-2-2010 by Vogelzang]
[Edited on 6-2-2010 by Vogelzang]
|
|
|
Vogelzang
Banned
Posts: 662
Registered: 26-4-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I often see this knee jerk response to criticism of Einstein's relativity theories where they automatically refer to the critics as crackpots. Was
Tesla a crackpot? See what he says here:
| Quote: |
Contemporary astrophysics explains gravitation by parroting Einstein's general theory of relativity, which theorized that massive bodies exert their
pull by warping the metric of space itself. But Einstein never explained HOW mass warped space. In 1932 Nikola Tesla was asked about this problem by
the New York Times, which published the Serbian genius's reply in their newspaper on July 10, 1932: "I hold that space cannot be curved, for the
simple reason that it can have no properties ...... Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the space. To say that in the
presence of large bodies space becomes curved is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I, for one, refuse to subscribe to such a
view."
|
http://www.curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=830302
Was Einstein a communist? Check out this shocking dirt on Einstein supressed by the left wing professors in order to facilitate a one world communist
government.
The Einstein File: J. Edgar Hoover's Secret War Against the World's Most Famous Scientist By Fred Jerome
http://tinyurl.com/yh3ff5y
Einstein's FBI files:
http://foia.fbi.gov/foiaindex/einstein.htm
Check this out. On the 64th page of einstein1a.pdf (Part1a) here
http://foia.fbi.gov/foiaindex/einstein.htm
its says that Nikola Tesla said: "The Einstein theory in many respects is erroneous"
Page 64:
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/8/24/2063601/physics/einst...
Fred Jerome:
http://www.theeinsteinfile.com/portal/alias__Einstein/lang__...
[Edited on 10-2-2010 by Vogelzang]
|
|
|
Vogelzang
Banned
Posts: 662
Registered: 26-4-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Here's something that's too shocking for a lot of scientists to believe. I found it here:
http://www.groupsrv.com/science/about46245.html
but apparently a corrupt moderator edited the original post in order to hide criticism of Einstein's relativity theories.
John Bell the well known quantum mechanics guru said something that many would consider crackpot if it came from someone else, but yet he's considered
an important contributor to quantum mechanics.
| Quote: |
During a radio interview on BBC Radio 3 in the mid 1980s', John Bell, the
theoretical physicist made famous for his now famous 'Bells Theorem', made
some rather eye opening statements when discussing his theorem and Alain
Aspect's experimental results. To say Bell liked a deterministic universe
seems to put it mildly - he called it super deterministic. Bell's inequality
seems to be rooted in two assumptions, namely that there is an objective
reality, and the concept of locality. Aspects' experiments seem to mean one
of these has to go, but Bell, surprisingly favored going to the pre-einstein
views of Larmor, Poincare, Fitzgerald, and Lorentz - that LR is not
inconsistent with relativity theory. The idea that there is an aether, and
Fitzgerald contractions and Larmor dilations are not detected because the
experimental devices are affected by them in exactly the right amount to
null the result of the detection is a "perfectly coherent point of view."
Einstein Relativity was adopted more because of the philosophy - that what
is unobserved does not exist - and because Einstein had found a theory that
was simpler when the Aether was left out. This speaks volumes - it suggests
that because the Aether became non-PC for the times, the philosopher
scientists of the day seized upon the first theory that worked without
Aether in it - if Joe Blow the trashman had been there first with a theory
he had come upon between trash runs, we would be today referring to
Joeblowian Relativity. Einstein was just in the right place in the right
time. Bell comes very close to saying the results of Alain Aspect's
experimental results *demand* an Aether theory.
It is too bad Bell died before he could read my web site. His question would
have been answered. I'll have more to say on this later when I discuss the
resolution to the paradox of Unitarianism in QM, and how it is a non-issue.
Greysky
http://www.allocations.cc
Learn how to build a FTL radio.
http://www.groupsrv.com/science/about46245.html
|
[Edited on 9-2-2010 by Vogelzang]
|
|
|
Vogelzang
Banned
Posts: 662
Registered: 26-4-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Another hero of quantum mechanics, Paul Dirac, says the aether exists even when most physics and astronomy teachers say it doesn't exist.
http://www.jstor.org/pss/3929566
Attachment: Nature1951-Vol168-p906-907.pdf (210kB)
This file has been downloaded 525 times
[Edited on 9-2-2010 by Vogelzang]
|
|
|
Vogelzang
Banned
Posts: 662
Registered: 26-4-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
After trying to read through that page, it reminds me of this:
http://lofi.forum.physorg.com/existence-of-maximal-surfaces-...
It might be computer generated gobbledegoop.
|
|
|
Vogelzang
Banned
Posts: 662
Registered: 26-4-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
This looks like a paper I've seen written by a NASA scientist.
we are wanting a spacetime more large than minkowskian spacetimes.then could to think in the anti-desiiter universe.then could to obtains equations to
curved hyperbolic manifolds,where the topology is non-trivial.spacetimes then are non-minkowskian.it is has dimension major than 4,with the reversal
cpt,reastauring,the
breakdown of rotational invariance,doing appear a fifth-dimension to the 3D of space.Then the groupSO(3,2) does the transition to SO(.4,1)
then could to stabilation of vaccum a dynamically symmetry breaking in curved spacetime,where particles and antiparticles has different gravitational
potential.generated by the distict metric of the curvatures of spacetimes. thence doeas appear a selfinteracting scalar fields with topology R^1 x
S^1x S^1 xS^1 x S^1.then the metric of vaccum must be stable. sudy of quantum field theory in spacetime other than minkowski spacetime,is being better
observed.the difference can to be a consequence of either a nontrivial topology or else curvaturethe configurations of the vertex of
spacetime,generate
orbifolds,that are associated to double-periodic non-jacobian elliptic spaces.then the breakdown of rotational invariance( are linked to the hidden
symmetris,that are renormalized by the conjugation of cpt and the invariance of lorentz is a subgroup generated by the enormalizations of the
rotational invariance) then the relations of spacetimes to differents observers to events distants are given by sequences of events measureds by
distict events,becoming the relations
continues of spacetimes.
care and de ditter gauge theories with propagating TORSION
the local poincare P10 gauge rotations and translations take place in the tangent
spaces to the spacetimes manifolds.we interpret the independence of matter fields from the tangent vectors as the necessity to use a nonlinear
realizations of the P10 or S10 groups thus effectevely BREAKING the FULL SYMMETRY to the LORENTZ
GROUP.the LAGRANGIAN we choose is the S10 YANG-MILLS invariant with the spacetime metric expressed in terms of the translational part of the S10
NONLINEAR GAUGE FIELDS
have the propagating spin-conection(THAT IS EXPRESSED IN THE ROTATIONAL INVARIANCE TO SPACETIMES IN FOUTH_DIMENSION,WHERE THE R.I.BROKEN,IS
RESTAURED BY THE PRESENCE OF TORSION FIELDS OF CARTAN) interactions,the analogy with the chiral higgs mechanisms,instantonslike solutions,a
possibility of gravitational repulsion due to the concompactness of the lorentz group.we also analyze the quantization of the theories with TORSION
with special presence of the nonlinear realizations.we streess the possibility of obtaining a renormalizable theory is not quantized but is expressed
in terms of a mean value of the quantization S10 nonlinear gauge field.
we are trying extend the GR using the gauge approach,through of einstein -cartan theories ,where P10 =T4 x )L6-or the semidirect product of the
translational T4=R^
1,3 and lorentz L6=SO(1,3) subgroups) thus the tetrad e^a_u and the lorentz connection w^ab_u as the gauge potentials and the torsion @^a_uv=D_ue^a_v-
D_ve^a_u and the curvature R^a_buv=
[Q_uw_v + w_uw_v-(u<->v)]^a_b.
we consider T4 translational acting in the tangent affine spaces(and not as infinitesimal coordinate transformations)and show that one must use the
nonlinear realization of the T4 symmetry in order to obtain a gravitational theory and not the "internal" P10 theory(spontaneous breakdown of T4 in
our approach correspond to the trivial invariance of the ordinary matter firlds
non-linear gauge field
Z={w k_0^-1 tetha}
{0 0 }
gravitational particles -antiparticles asymmetry and the 4-dimensional yang-mills gauge symmetry.
a formulation of gravity based on the maximum four-dimension yang-mills gauge symmetry is studied.the theory pridicts that the gravitastional force
inside (fermions)is different from inside antiparticles(antifermions).the difference could to the transitions cosmic, internal symmetry breaking in
the matter,still,unstable,in the protovaccum,and was during the cosmic eviltion,through of the deformations
topologic of spacetimes,that is(PT,c,and C is generated by that breakdown of invariance of pt).moreover,a new gravitational long-range spin-force
between two fermions is predited,in addition usul of the gravitational of newton.
the geometrical-topological foubdations of such a gravitational theory is the riemann-cartan geometry,in the which there is a TORSION( asymmetry
between particles-antiparticles into spacetimes geometry-topologic.then fermions and antifermions has different quantities in the universe.and
hypothesis that the gravitational forces between particles and antiparticles are differents.
then the riemann geometry is not a subtable and adequate foundations for physical spacetime.then the riemann be extended to the general riemann-cartan
geometry which invilves a CARTAN TORSION TENSOR related to the gravitational spin-force.according to the yang-mills idea,thew gauge fields are
intimately related to the invariance concept at every point in spacetime and they are postulated to the basic dynamical fields.however ,the metric
tensor of spacetime is defined to be fuction of gauge fields.it must be stressed that the yang-mills gauge symmetry implies that,the gravitational
lagrangian should be quadratic in the gauge field strenght.
why should one generalize the riemann geometry for physical spacetime?
the riemann geometry is not appropriate to accommodate spinor fields.need of the
covariance systems to think in gauge symmetry fields with GR
http://lofi.forum.physorg.com/existence-of-maximal-surfaces-...
[Edited on 10-2-2010 by Vogelzang]
|
|
|
Crowbar
Harmless
Posts: 13
Registered: 13-3-2009
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
Some people had a problem with the readability of the document. There's a better writeup here: http://www.fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/467
|
|
|
franklyn
International Hazard
Posts: 3026
Registered: 30-5-2006
Location: Da Big Apple
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
The supposed grand unification strives to define the known four forces
as vector parts of one concurrent fundamental force. This idea does not
preclude that each subpart in turn is composed of other vector components.
Without a clear view of what sort of manifold is entailed , the consistent
mathematical descriptions there are , only represent connected dots in an
undefined multidimensional graph. That there may be more dimensions than
the ones known is a standard hypothesis in current research , so what
precludes that there cannot be other forces as well.
.
|
|
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
