/home/bill/Projects/NPA - physics/140201 NPA Bill Lucas - Mach’s Principle and the Anomalous Acceleration on Pioneer 10 and 11.txt NOTE: Timings of subjects presented are given at the end of this file! NASA has measured an anomalous acceleration of 8.74±1.33×10−10 m/s2 on the Pioneer 10 and 11 space craft that is unexplainable in terms of politically correct science. This presentation will show that the same electrodynamic approach to gravity and inertia that explained the unexpectedly high constant velocity of the outer arms of spiral galaxies also explains the anomalous acceleration measured on Pioneer 10 and 11 space craft when Mach’s Principle is applied. Also includes Voyageur spacecraft Electromagnetic force >>>>> gravity !!! Bill Lucas' book "Universal Force, Volume 1" did I buy this? www.amazon.com Lucas is working on Volume 2 - elementary particles Radio-halo data - sows Earth is 6 to 9 ky old!!! Polonium 214 - half life ?very small? but everywhere on Earth round ones - primordial, new ones - elliptical ***************************** Howell's comments : I can't really see the difference between Mach's principle and Newtonian - other than we usually ignore the rest of the universe... (small detail?) Greg Volk to Everyone: To Bill Howell. Newton's paradigm presumes that objects moves relative to fixed space, while Mach ascribes motion only relative to other objects. Greg Volk to Everyone: No matter ow distant from each other. Howell, Bill - Alberta to Everyone: Thanks, Greg. Theories have to do more than fit data : It seems to me that mathematical / statistical tools are sufficiently powerful, along with looseness of application and fuzzy thinking, to be able to fit data on complex systems in many different conflictig ways ("multiple conflicting hypothesis"). In the past I would have taken a good fit on complex data as a confirmation of "validity and truth" of a model, but I no longer see it that way. As Bill Lucas seems to imply, there is more to truth than just that. **************************** Others comments that caught my eye **************************** Full chat stream baunes to Everyone: test Glenn Baxter to Everyone: Hello. baunes to Everyone: hi. Not many chatters. Glenn Baxter to Everyone: Hi. baunes to Everyone: glen. only us two here! Glenn Baxter to Everyone: No slides here..... Roger Anderton to Everyone: mond is just Boscovich theory; Boscovich allows gravity to reverse direction baunes to Everyone: no vid today or its just me? baunes to Everyone: I see presentation, but no presenter (no vids). Glenn Baxter to Everyone: Me too. Ian Cowan to Everyone: video seemed to be on at start - then went Greg Volk to Everyone: My camera doesn't work, and I guess Dr. Lucas didn't get his working either. Sorry. Glenn Baxter to Everyone: Rather, no slides either. John Wsol to Everyone: Newtonian dynamics works well for our Solar System because 99+% of the solar system's mass in concentrated in the center -- the Sun. Galaxies distrubute the mass around the core and ALONG the SPIRAL ARMS. So this creates twisted spiral shape to the spacetime manifold that corresponds to the distribution of mass density. Greg Volk to Everyone: You can all see the powerpoint OK? Franklin Hu to Everyone: powerpoint is ok Glenn Baxter to Everyone: No. Paulina to Everyone: It's fine. baunes to Everyone: yup Nick Percival to Everyone: Yes John Wsol to Everyone: Powerpoint look'n ok -- even on Mac version of Fuze. baunes to Everyone: John. The shape/distribution is taken into a ccount already. Howell, Bill - Alberta to Everyone: I can't really see the difference between Mach's principle and Newtonian - other than we usually ignore the rest of the universe... (small detail?) John Wsol to Everyone: I have yet to see a paper that makes that clear. I'm my understanding the stars tend to "fall" along the downward slope of the space-time manifold -- NOT just directed towards the center of the galaxy. (Additionally, everyone "assumes" that the galaxy itself "does not expand" with the universe. It DOES, yet I agree at a slower rate than the gaps between galazies. Greg Volk to Everyone: To Bill Howell. Newton's paradigm presumes that objects moves relative to fixed space, while Mach ascribes motion only relative to other objects. Greg Volk to Everyone: No matter ow distant from each other. Glenn Baxter2 to Everyone: I am all set now. Howell, Bill - Alberta to Everyone: Thanks, Greg. Franklin Hu to Everyone: I only see 2 structures in that proton data. baunes to Everyone: There are rows of rhos there! Richard Jesch to Everyone: Ha Ha Greg Volk to Everyone: A rhos would smell as sweet baunes to Everyone: Say that in 13 days. Paul Blake to Everyone: I've seen this before Paul Blake to Everyone: he has a few interesating vids Michael Anteski to Everyone: Moon separated from Pacific Basin and Earth is just rounding itself off Paul Blake to Everyone: i've never heard that one. Why does it keep the same face to earth? Joseph to Everyone: www.milesmathis.com maybe of interest here to some. John Wsol (on PC) to Everyone: His other vids show this expansion phenomenon for Mars and the moons of Jupiter. (The WHOLE uneverse expand as the natural progression of time.. Michael Anteski to Everyone: Moon separated at a spongy low layer and lifted off - no rotation involved John Wsol (on PC) to Everyone: The crust of planets expand slightly slower than their interiors. Joseph to Everyone: http://milesmathis.com/bode.html an exact solution to Bodes Law Joseph to Everyone: Last URL! http://milesmathis.com/uft.html Newtons modified Equation to account for "Charge" Jaythree to Everyone: The quasar protons are newer? John Wsol (on PC) to Everyone: The protons "age" slower -- mass density in the vicinity of the quasar must be much higher then the surrounding space and normal neighboring galaxies. John Wsol (on PC) to Everyone: Meaning that time in that regain progresses slower. Michael Anteski to Everyone: Quasar are newer because it took a long time for stars to die and quasars to form John Wsol (on PC) to Everyone: "region" Paulina to Everyone: Yes, that is what Arp suggests. They are ejected along the axis of an active galaxy. Jaythree to Everyone: But mass:time:v is GR Paulina to Everyone: There are several working theories for why the redshift decreases with distance from the active galaxy. But Arp surveyed hundreds of them and found the quasars are always found near the galaxies. John Wsol (on PC) to Everyone: GR is Einstein's way of explaining it. That would be a good question for clarification during Q&Q by Dr. Lucas Gerry Brown to Everyone: The video is not visible. Please give me a web link to find it. thanks John Wsol (on PC) to Everyone: Mouse over the video area -- click ==> Glenn Baxter2 to Everyone: No video here either. Gerry Brown to Everyone: I think this is it:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHlAJ7vySC8 baunes to Everyone: mouse over screen, then click the play Paul Blake to Everyone: i've seen this one too Paul Blake to Everyone: it was one of youtube's suggested videos a couple years ago Joseph to Everyone: Appreciate the video, but they are not visible on my iPad nor the controls 'Arrows' to start them. I've seen this video on Youtube. great Video! Jaythree to Everyone: Re Arp, see his "Catalogue of Discordant Redshift Associations: the Cambridge 3C sample of 400-500 radio sources Only 50 are quasars. John Wsol (on PC) to Everyone: Jaythree: interesting info! I'm curious if there has been redshift study of the connecting filiments between the quasar and the neighboring "normal" galaxy? (Let me know if you know of such a reference) John Wsol (on PC) to Everyone: I understand the acceleration is directed "towards" the Sun -- would not this be anegative value? Since it would be slowing down the spacescraft as it leaves the solar system? Jaythree to Everyone: John, see Arp, SciAm 1963, proposing that galactic spiral arms are caused by the ejection of compact material from the nuclei of the galaxies. John Wsol (on PC) to Everyone: Jaythree: Thanks so much! Jaythree to Everyone: Einstein also said a theory should be simple but not too simple :) Jaythree to Everyone: Sorry, all, I'll shut up now. Paulina to Everyone: Thank you, those were beautiful slides Paulina to Everyone: You have to use your snipping tool to save them. Joe Bova to Everyone: Greg, were are you putting them, WSD or NPA? Franklin Hu to Everyone: Here is experiment showing Lenz Law for plain loop of wire: http://youtu.be/4izLnRLbV1k Joseph to Everyone: Do Photons have mass in your conception? paul schroeder to Everyone: Good talk Dr Lucas. I have to go now. Jeff Cook to Everyone: What's the title again? Jeff Cook to Everyone: Or the number? Greg Volk to Everyone: 978-1482328943 Joseph to Everyone: Just went to createspace.com, you have to sign up to view the books for sale it seems... Jim Marsen to Everyone: what is Bill's position on ether? Paul Blake to Everyone: on amazon Paul Blake to Everyone: http://www.amazon.com/The-Universal-Force-Volume-Scientific/dp/1482328941/ref=sr_1_1 Phil Bouchard2 to Everyone: I am ordering the book as well Franklin Hu to Everyone: See: http://www.halos.com/ Jerry Hynecek to Everyone: radiation halo refuted here: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/po-halos/gentry.html Jerry Hynecek to Everyone: Pioneer anomaly explained here: http://www.planetary.org/blogs/bruce-betts/3459.html Joseph to Everyone: Question: if gravity is less how can a fossilized tree of about 900 feet be explained discovered in Texas in 1921-1922? And an 'Expanding Earth' according to the 'stretch Marks' in the mid-oceanic ridges, implies less mass so lower gravity... Can this be addressed? Tks. Paul Blake to Everyone: mass same density change Paulina to Everyone: They do not have to reject a paradigm unless they accept a new paradigm, thanks to Kuhn. Joe Bova to Everyone: Back to Talkorigins, how can they justify dinosaur DNA finds? Jaythree to Everyone: Too scary to reject the conservation laws assumption. Jeff Cook to Everyone: Hello? Jeff Cook to Everyone: Talking. Paulina to Everyone: That is the funniest sound Joe Bova to Everyone: Binary encoded data.:-) Jeff Cook to Everyone: Ok...I'l type. Richard Jesch to Everyone: Alvin? george james ducas to Everyone: his voice decayed Jeff Cook to Everyone: Chat!!!!!!!! Jeff Cook to Everyone: ? Jerry Hynecek to Everyone: Maxwell got to him Paulina to Everyone: No tell him to sing Jeff Cook to Everyone: Okay, here's my question baunes to Everyone: I made out what he said!! Jeff Cook to Everyone: If I were to go to Wikipedia... Jeff Cook to Everyone: To read Lucas' definitions... Joe Bova to Everyone: Information entropy at its best baunes to Everyone: I decoded him! baunes to Everyone: gotta go Jeff Cook to Everyone: Of "mass", "gravity" and subatomic "vibration" in one sentence each parameter, what would each parameter read? Paulina to Everyone: Bye! Jeff Cook to Everyone: In other words, in one sentence, what is "mass", "gravity" and subatomic "vibration" Howell, Bill - Alberta to Everyone: Theories have to do more than fit data : It seems to me that mathematical / statistical tools are sufficiently powerful, along with looseness of application and fuzzy thinking, to be able to fit data on complex systems in many different conflictig ways ("multiple conflicting hypothesis"). In the past I would have taken a good fit on complex data as a confirmation of "validity and truth" of a model, but I no longer see it that way. As Bill Lucas seems to imply, there is more to truth than just that. Paulina to Everyone: Thank you for the links and the question, Franklin. Gerry Brown to Everyone: Your illustration showing the tilt of the planetary orbits about the sun shows this nicely... Jaythree to Everyone: John W, thanks. Remaining private for now. Joe Bova to Everyone: Thank you Bill for an excellent reminder that there is still sanity in science! Got to go... Paul Blake to Everyone: is bill lucas the one who models fundamental particles as rings? Or is that someone else? Richard Jesch to Everyone: Same Dowdye to Everyone: Question to Dr Bill, is the Earth's orbital plane perpendicular to the direction of the orbit of the sun about the Galaxy? Jeff Cook to Everyone: Yes, thank you! Jeff Cook to Everyone: I can' Jeff Cook to Everyone: I can't grasp that. aythree to Everyone: What exxperiment would falsify the theory that gravity derives from dipole interaction? Franklin Hu to Everyone: I would say that if you could cool particles to zero (remove vibrations) and you still see gravitational interaction, that would falsify Franklin Hu to Everyone: On the other hand, if gravitational interaction disappears, that would support Jaythree to Everyone: In a Bose-Einstein condensate? Bob de Hilster to Everyone: So what is Mass? Franklin Hu to Everyone: Yes, Bose-Einstein condensate show weired interactions that need to be explained Jeff Cook to Everyone: I think there needs to be a short, one sentence explanation of these apparently fundamental parameters of nature that everyone sees around us. I am often hearing "no one knows what gravity is" and I must admit that is something I too still want to know. Franklin Hu to Everyone: Bill just thinks gravity is a weak electrostatic attraction between dipoles. Paulina to Everyone: Dr. Dowdye typed in a question Franklin Hu to Everyone: I think bill would say that Mass is just something that is a measured value based on the electrodynamic environment. Franklin Hu to Everyone: Were you aware that the mass of an electron can change depending on its environment? Jeff Cook to Everyone: I am aware of that, and I understand his theory...except when it gets to mass and his vibrations. What movements cause the vibrations or the mass? Jeff Cook to Everyone: It's not a hole...is just not clear to me. Franklin Hu to Everyone: My own theory is that it is just particles bumping into each other as part of thermal ambient energy Jeff Cook to Everyone: See, that I get my head around. In understanding the fundamental, then these basics need to be defined. Franklin Hu to Everyone: For me, mass is just a measure of how difficult it is to push a particle thorugh the aether, not a fundamental property of the particle. Jeff Cook to Everyone: What then would be the cause of the resistance...why shouldn't it be completely free to move? Jaythree to Everyone: Thanks for an informative presentation, Dr. Lucas. Franklin Hu to Everyone: I would say it is all the aether particles that have to be pushed aside. Franklin Hu to Everyone: Much like pushing a spoon through molasses Jeff Cook to Everyone: "Aether particles" then would be dependent on time. ??? John Wsol (on PC) to Everyone: Jeff, If there is ONE thing I can say "I understand" it is that -- "What is gravity?" In my "Cosmic Onion Model" I explain it, NOT as a fundamental cause, but as a 4th-stage EFFECT. See my NPA profile under the definition of "Gravity" http://www.worldsci.org/php/index.php?tab0=Scientists&tab1=Display&name=John_Wsol Franklin Hu to Everyone: I don't think there is any time dependence on aether particles. Osvaldo Domann to Everyone: Strict scientific reasoning and good presentation in clear and good english. Jeff Cook to Everyone: I would agree, Franklin. But then how could we describe it's motion without time. Franklin Hu to Everyone: There is always time and motion happens when you see a different geometric arrangemenht of a particle to the background formed by the aether. Franklin Hu to Everyone: I would also say that time is effectively quantized since it takes a fixed amount of time for a particle to pass by an aether particle. Kracklauer to Everyone: Neutral atoms polarize each other and therefore alsways interact e&m-wise. Franklin Hu to Everyone: Thanks, got to go... Dowdye to Everyone: Question to Dr Bill, is the Earth's orbital plane perpendicular to the direction of the orbit of the sun about the Galaxy? Jeff Cook to Everyone: Thanks, Bill. Great presentation. Glenn Baxter2 to Everyone: Nice job Dr. Lucas! Osvaldo Domann to Everyone: Thank you Bill. Wonderfull presentation. Dowdye to Everyone: Question to Dr Bill, is the Earth's orbital plane perpendicular to the direction of the orbit of the sun about the Galaxy? Richard Jesch to Everyone: Nice to see this presentation. Thank you Bill Dowdye to Everyone: The Toroid effect you diagram assumes pupedicular Dowdye to Everyone: Did you notice from experiment that a current on wire about toroid produces a magnet field about inner center or toroid. John Wsol (on PC) to Everyone: To visualize the "tilts" between the earth's rotational axis, the earths plane of revolution, and the galactic plane -- get Stellarium and activate the various grids. Dowdye to Everyone: Max field is inside the donut, little field outside of it Dowdye to Everyone: I agree with that Bill, you statement confirms experiment John Wsol (on PC) to Everyone: http://www.stellarium.org/ Dowdye to Everyone: Dr Lucas could you give me a phone call please after you are done? Dowdye to Everyone: In my FAITH if God created the UNIVERSE HE also created the science that set it ALL in Motion THERE IS NO CONFLICT BETWEEN GOD AND SCIENCE... Dowdye to Everyone: Dr Lucas GOOD JOB please give me a phone call. Thanks ...break in connection ... Paulina to Everyone: inre "why physicists are hyper-dogmatic." ************************* VidCam recording timings +-----+ 00005.MTS 11:30 End of presentation 12:38 Glen Baxter - effect of removing core of solenoid in vacuum - would induced currents still be induced in the same direction? - would light still be polarized? (Faraday with glass core rotated light) 14:37 Glen Baxter - what is "radiation reaction"? - what is being radiated, and does it have mass? >?photon - universal force consequence is that only vibrating charges/dipoles etc produce inertial mass 19:01 Glen Baxter - where can I get your book? > www.amazon.com 21:18 Nick Percival - relativistic term from relativity? > same expression but absolutely NOT from relativity, interpretation is TOTALLY different - lambda is a function of what velocity? > relative velocity, test charge, ?Galilean? - gravity decays - how fast? > I haven't calculated - depends on size & shape, most decay occurred early in history of Earth (oceans are very young - 6 ky) > I am a world expert on radio-halos - all 82 known methods to date age of Earth via radio-active decay give 6-12ky, only 4 methods have EVER been interpreted to give an old age - invalidated by radio-halo data that was excluded! All Oak Ridge radio-halo experts were fired - they don't want that data getting out. 32:26 end of 00005.MTS +-----+ 00006.MTS ... continued Many processes effects in universe we've had difficulty explaining, but now we have better explanations. Data and formulae are the same This comes about because last 150 years of philosophies of science [previously existential -> now today ?can't hear?] don't belief in truth, don't falsify theories on [assumptions, poor logic]; they only falsify theories based on predictions of hypothesis generated by the theories whether or not they agree with data [Howell - NO - they don't fit the data either, at least not honest data!]. This is too weak a falsification basis for truth. eg ALL 5 assumptions of Relativity are all known to be false. (point particle approximation, 1961 Nobel Prize for it (?this assumption, or proving it wrong?)). Why haven't the theories been corrected? - Because they don't believe in the truth, because they don't believe that assumptions are important. Greg Volk interjection - Nick Percival's question about how rapid . One explanation might be time constants associated with time constants. Bill Lucas - Earth's decay would be different than larger bodies (sun, galaxy) Greg Volk - Lucas's statement that it's not enough to fit the data, it must also have logical consistency in its assumptions. enddoc