Gravity Concepts, Sec. 60, Rev. August 18, 2017
|Radiant Press||Gravity Shield||Gravity Anoma||Resolve Anomal|
|Rad.-Energy >||< Field Propel||Rad. Images||Double Force Paradox|
|Grav. Constants||Create Energy||Grav. Links||Review Letters|
The graph of
Radiant Pressure vs Projected Shadow Area
demonstrates the effect of the radiation and shadowing
system of force on the Planetary scale.
This article and it's Stepped Mass Loss Graph graph demonstrate the effect of the radiation and shadowing system of force on the Atomic scale.
Without internal shielding we would expect an atom's weight to equal the sum of its parts. It is established that the atomic weight of an atom is actually less than the sum of the weights of the protons, neutrons and electrons. A helium atom is 99.29% of the weight of its individual parts, which are essentially four hydrogen atoms. This hidden mass is normally called the mass defect. Most of our work for harnessing fission and fusion energy is based on the assumption that atomic energy comes from a mass to energy conversion of the mass defect .
Any spherical object, such as a nucleus, made up of smaller round objects would be expected to be made up in a layered structure. When one builds a ball out of homogeneous marbles, this characteristic is evident. Within the nucleus, if the mass loss per added nucleon stays constant for a given layer, and changes to a different value for the next layer, this would indicate that the mass loss is due to shielding. Thus attributing atomic energy to the mass loss and a mass to energy conversion as in E = M x c squared is not available in this model.
In order to demonstrate the periodic change in shadowing as the layers of the nucleus are added, the actual mass loss of each added particle as a percentage of its own actual mass is plotted with the mass number on the X axis. The table of isotopes in the CRC handbook of Chemistry and Physics provides atomic weight data to calculate the actual measured mass in grams of each isotope. When one adds one nucleon to a nucleus, the resulting isotope will also have a measured mass available in the data table. The difference between the two measurements represents the mass added due to the added nucleon. This measured added mass is always less than the known actual mass of the isolated nucleon. When the measured added mass is divided by the nucleon mass it is found that only 99 percent plus is accounted for and that about one percent of the actual nucleon mass has been shielded. When this small percentage of mass lost by the individual added nucleon is plotted vs the mass number, distinct evidence of layering is seen. ( refer to FIGURE 4, STEPPED MASS LOSS GRAPH). It shows that the percentage of each nucleon mass loss remains constant for each group of mass numbers, which represent a layer.
It should be noted that shielding and shadowing is a mutual phenomenon. One half of any added mass loss occurs for the added particle and one half resides with the nucleus. For nuclei of 2, 3 and 4 particles this feature has a large effect on the shielding data. For a two-particle nuclei the total mass loss is not just with the second particle. The STEPPED MASS LOSS GRAPH, FIGURE 4 is derived with the spreadsheet program, Quattro Pro, and does not take the mutual mass force shielding into account.
As the nucleus increases in mass number and steps to the
next radius, the percentage of loss steps to a different
constant value for this new layer. It is shown on the graph
how the steps and groups in this stepped mass loss graph
coincide with the known steps and groups in the periodic
table of the elements. Most of the layer changes take place
coincident with the INERT gas positions on the periodic
table. Two major layer changes coincide with the rare earth
series, Lanthanides and Actinides. It seems apparent that
shielding is the mechanism that limits the size available
for stable nuclei. Shielding from the nuclei deprives the
added particle of the flow necessary for its very existence.
This characteristic of layering and shadowing changes is
logically predicted by a radiant flow and shadowing theory
of remote forces.
It was expected, it was searched for, and it is clearly evident in the existing data.
There is a classical average mass loss curve common in most general physics books that must not be confused with the above described curve. The ordinate of the average mass defect curve is obtained by taking the total mass loss of the isotope and dividing that by the total number of nucleons. This results in an average mass loss for all nucleons of the isotope and will not demonstrate the mass loss of the individual nucleon of a particular layer. This classical average is plotted as a function of the mass number, N on the X axis. This is then called by various terms such as "binding energy" per nucleon or "packing fraction" or "mass defect".
A quote from Hans Bethe's book, Elementary Nuclear Theory, sheds some insight on this models concept of the source of the atomic energy originating from the prime radiation.
Quote...According to Einstein's relation, the energy equivalent of a change in mass is E = MC squared.
Such changes in mass occur when protons and neutrons are changed from one configuration to another in which they are bound more or less strongly.
There is no evidence at the present for the total annihilation of heavy particles (protons or neutrons).
No reason can be seen to relate shielded mass to the amount of atomic energy available from a nuclear reaction. When a proton or neutron is separated from a nucleus the "lost mass", shielded mass will again be manifested, when it is no longer shielded by the other nucleons. The energy exhibited in an atomic reaction existed in that point of radiant space before the reaction and will again be available after the reaction. The atomic energy does not come from the shielded mass conversion. The fission of the nucleus only provides the disturbance that allows the radiant sea of space to demonstrate a small portion of its unlimited power. Mass and inertia are features of the radiant flow and not features of the particle.
With this shadowing model accounting for the "mass defect" and Hans Beth's quote indicating that there is no known evidence for the conversion of a nucleon into energy,... is there any evidence remaining which supports the popular equation E = MC squared. Mass is a measure of force due to the mutual interaction between a quantity of matter and the prime radiant sea, it is not a measure of the quantity of matter. The mass number [ number of nucleon particles ] is the measure for the quantity of atomic matter.
In this model, nucleons consist of multi-layered vortices in sub-spectrums of the radiant flow of space. Any disturbance or separation of whirlpools or established flows would be expected to cause modulations and ripples in the radiant flows of space. The resulting modulations and ripples which occur in frequencies of our sub-spectrums of material existence are called E M energy and called particles with no rest mass. In other sub-spectrums of the isotropic radiant sea of space our energy would have no effect or may be considered noise. It is considered energy in our spectral and time domains of existence only because it is the proper wavelength to interact with the multi-layered Prime radiation whirlpools which constitute our matter.
The conventional standard model of "binding energy" is described in a manner similar to conventional gravitational theory, every one of the nucleons has an inherent attraction to every other nucleon, with no cause or physical systems model described for the force. If this assumption were true there could be no layering in the stepped mass loss per nucleon curve. Since the assumed attraction is to every other nucleon the loss would have to be directly proportional to the number of nucleons. There would be no steps and constant sections in the stepped mass loss per added nucleon curve.
Paraphrased from the Standard
Model: In the conventional model of the nucleus the lost mass is
somehow converted to and "stored" as binding energy.
In the case of fission, uranium with a large nucleus has less binding energy per nucleon than its smaller fission products. When fission takes place the mass decreases because more "binding energy" is required for the products, yet, the mass also decreases because mass must be "converted to energy" to account for the atomic energy release.
In the case of fusion, two smaller nuclei are combined to form a larger nucleus which requires more "binding energy" per nucleon and less mass. The mass loss again is required to furnish the added binding energy and the converted energy for the explosion. Can one have two explanations for the one phenomenon, as within the conventional model ?
The shadowing feature of this radiant pressure model provides a single
explanation and removes the necessity to view a nuclear
reaction as a mass to energy conversion. The mass that
appears to be lost in a nuclear reaction was only shielded
and is measurable again when the nuclear particles are
separated. The energy exhibited in the process existed in
the isotropic radiant flows as potential energy at that
point in space before the reaction and is still available
there after the process. The energy of the Atomic reaction is a result of the
radiant flow reestablishing isotropic interaction with the previously shielded
nucleons. The same type of energy exhibition should occur if one of the large
black shadow planets were broken up into smaller pieces.
The energy of the Sun is not derived from consuming or burning expendable mass. The solar process, whether nuclear or not, is converting the un-expendable prime radiation of space to spectrums that are called energy for our spectral domain of interest.
If one could measure and prove that mass was annihilated and that the lost mass was proportional to the released energy, this would still not prove that mass was converted to energy.
"Assuming" that the release of energy in the conventional model, is due to a mass to energy conversion,... leads to the
comforting belief that a nuclear conflagration will cease
when the uranium fuel is used up.
This belief was necessary before man took the risk of igniting the first atomic explosion.
It is expected that this shielding of the strong force, inertial force and mass on the nuclear scale is of a different nature than the macroscopic planetary gravitational shielding. The particles may be sharing the same radiant flow streams and interference patterns in much the same manner as the natural phenomenon of vortex shedding patterns in fluid flow systems. The overlapping black shadows result only in apparent mass loss. There may be some tests that compare this gravitational mass loss with the inertial mass loss for this mass defect shielding. Shielding may be the limiting factor that determines the largest size available for stable nuclei.
In this model the apparent mass still changes and energy is exhibited but that is not proof that a mass to energy conversion took place. The chain reaction of fission or fusion does not need to be explained as the result of a mass to energy conversion any more than the chain reaction of burning does. If our exceedingly expensive fusion and laser fusion programs still view the " mass to energy conversion " as the only possible source of the energy, actual processes for interacting with the potential energy of radiant space may never be exposed.
The radiant flows of space are the substance of the nuclei and are the prime cause of the effects we call energy. There is no mass defect. The mass is only temporarily shadowed from the flow and is not converted at all. Thus atomic energy is not atomic at all, it is just a temporary disturbance in the radiant flow of space. Every particle within our known universe and sub spectra of existence could decay to nothing and the radiant flow of space would still exist.
An atom is continuously interacting with its characteristic existence spectrum. As in the quantum theory, interaction of radiation with matter takes place in discreet quanta or photons, with an all or none characteristic. A single photon, consists of a limited number of waves (coherence length). The prime radiation frequency of the beginning portion of the interacting photon wave train is determined by the characteristic existence "absorption" spectrum of the particle. Since the photon is a series of waves, a given time interval is required for the complete interaction. As an atom is accelerated within the balanced prime background radiation, the Doppler effect will cause a relative frequency and flow increase during the photon absorption time interval. This results in a radiation flow increase in the forward direction. A proportionate decrease will occur in the trailing direction. Thus, an unbalanced prime radiation flow would result in a retarding force proportional to acceleration, F = MA. It should be noted that gravity is also caused by an unbalanced flow of radiation. The unbalanced flow for the Inertia System is caused by acceleration; and the unbalanced flow for the Gravitational System is caused by mutual shadowing.
After the interaction with one photon wave packet is terminated, the particle reverts to its original characteristic "absorption" frequency for interaction with the initial section of the next photon. This continuous saw tooth relative frequency variation and resultant radiant flow unbalance gives the force of inertia during acceleration. It can be seen that a Doppler shift does not occur for constant velocity during absorption (interaction) time, but only for acceleration.
It should be noted that the intermittent radiant flow, inherent in a photon system of radiation, is an absolute necessity for the operation of this Doppler model of inertial force. The ending of one photon allows the particle to switch to a photon train of a different wavelength as required by the different speed and yet retain its original characteristic "absorption" frequency.
The question of why a shadowed unbalanced radiant flow causes an object to fall toward a planet cannot be explained by saying that photons or quanta of radiation have inertia and impart momentum to the particle. If all inertia is caused by the primary radiant flow system described above, the radiant flow itself cannot have inertia. This is the main fault with the old material aether model. It assumes the material aether itself has inertia and therefore causes inertia,...without modeling an original cause for the inertia of the aether material.
The same logic faults the zero point energy theories, which propose an electromagnetic [EM] radiant aether. You cannot model the electrostatic potential force, E field, via the existence and shadowing of an isotropic medium consisting of electromagnetic radiation. Electromagnetic radiation first needs the electrostatic potential force field to exist. Electromagnetic radiation is a resonance within the isotropic cosmic E field of space. In a system of cause and effect, the effect cannot be its own parent nor can it be the cause of one of its separate parent causal phenomena. Levitation via the bootstraps has yet to be demonstrated, with the exception of Rube Goldberg's interesting comics. If the zero point energy EM spectrum (Vacuum) and its shadowing system is used to model all other remote forces, then a second separate causal medium must be modeled to account for the electrostatic potential remote force.
With this systems model the particle of matter, as a whirlpool, is a feature of the radiant flows. Thus, the falling of a particle in an unbalanced flow does not require momentum from the flow. The only primary necessity for this model of reality is the existence of non-particulate non-EM radiation. The model has removed the necessity to have mathematical imaginary lines of force and force "fields", and or graviton and gluon particles shuttling between bodies toting bundles of attractive force. The question of equivalence between gravitational and inertial force is also removed. Each is a distinct and separate feature of this radiation and shadowing model.
As noted previously, radiant energy that appears to be absorbed is not stored as an independent bundle of EM energy in a particle. The interacting process that appears to be absorption is only frequency conversion and changing of the interference patterns. An infinite source of energy and limited force is available at every point in space whether an atomic particle is there or not.
From prior presentations it seems apparent that the gravitational mass of planets and atomic nuclei are subject to shielding. The effect of shielding on inertial mass has not been directly discussed. A short study of the planetary orbital force balances, gravitational versus inertial, directly indicates that inertial mass must also be shielded. If inertial shielding did not occur in proportion to the gravitational shielding, the large shadowed planets would exhibit longer orbital periods than that which would agree with the known orbital radius and mass.
The gravitational mass of the sun is determined by the period and radius of the planets orbits. Each planet's orbital period and orbital radius should indicate the same gravitational mass for the Sun. If inertial shielding did not occur, the small non-shadowed planets would indicate one value for the Sun's mass and the large black shadow planets would indicate other values. To maintain orbit about the Sun the mutual gravitational force must equal the planet's inertial centrifugal force:
EQ.11 ( G Msg Mpg ) / RtRt = ( Mpi VpVp ) /Rc
= Gravitational Constant
= Mass of Sun (gravitational)
= Mass of Planet (gravitational)
= Distance between mass centers
= Mass of Planet (inertial)
= Velocity of Planet
= Planet's distance from center of rotation
EQ.11b Msg = ( VpVpR ) / G
Equation 11b is obtained by:
1. Assuming Rc is equal to Rt due to the extreme relative
size of the Sun, and
2. Assuming the gravitational mass of the planet, Mpg, is
equal to the inertial mass, Mpi.
If the gravitational mass and the inertial mass were not equally shielded, various values would be obtained for the Sun's mass. Since all planet orbit parameters, velocity and radius, yield the same value for the Sun's mass, inertial shielding must be proportional to any gravitational shielding that may exist for our planet sizes.
The characteristic that has been called mass in the classical equations and theories for gravity and inertia is actually the apparent mass. The actual amount of matter in a body will only be known if there is no shielding or the degree of shielding is known.
Thus, when the moons of a black shadow planet are shielded from the sun's gravitational affect by the black shadow of the planet, a perturbation of the orbit should not occur. The inertial force is proportionately decreased in that same direction.
The reported perturbations of a pendulums periods during solar eclipses indicate the black shadow does make a measurable change in gravity and inertia, but it is not readily evident how the period change is accomplished.
1970 Solar Eclipse as seen by Torsion Pendulum
It is expected that the moon is not completely shielded from the sun's gravitational effect during a lunar eclipse, since the effective gravitational shadow of the planet Earth would be increased in density as seen from the moon during the alignment.
Future work to define and measure the perturbations may be possible by using the following systems :
Particles at rest have no unbalanced force due to radiant flow, but are interacting symmetrically with the isotropic flows of their particular "existence spectrum". Particles in uniform linear motion also have no unbalanced force. The relevant spectrum remains isotropic with speed due to Doppler shift. For this reason, the state of rest cannot be determined in relation to the total isotropic radiant space and linear motion can only be determined as in relation to another object. A wide or infinite frequency spectrum is necessary to allow adequate range for Doppler shifts with motion.
The constituent matter of an emitter and it's light exist as disturbances in the prime radiation and therefore neither can exceed the speed of the prime radiation. The red shift that science currently attributes to Doppler shift and an expanding universe will require reconsideration in this model.
There is no known reason that suggests the presently detectable upper EM frequencies define an upper limit to the cosmic radiant frequencies. If the highest EM frequencies now detectable were an upper limit, an anisotropy should be detectable between the forward and trailing direction of our earth's motion in the universe. The ability to detect and measure the expanded prime spectrum predicted by this model will be necessary for control and utilization. X-rays did not exist until an accidental discovery.
Magnetism in space can be seen as an unstable or soft form of matter. The magnetic line is described as an elongated vortex disturbance in the radiant space. It emanates from the aligned whirlpool atoms of magnetic matter. In magnetized material many of the nuclear and electron whirlpools are aligned. This causes mutually reinforced helical disturbances in the radiant system of those frequencies. Reverting to a ray description of radiant flow, the ray impinges tangentially with the equator of the whirlpool vortex and exits in a right hand helical pattern toward the atom's one pole and a left hand helix toward the other pole. Higher frequency helixes would again be concentric and inside the lower frequency ones, and not necessarily in the same direction of spin. This spatial model conforms with the observed paths of electron and proton movement in a magnetic field. Thus, two right hand helixes repel each other when flowing from opposing poles since they have an opposite direction of spin. A left and a right hand helix merge and attract when facing since their direction of spin is then complementary.
In fluid flow system, whirlpools and vortices are an impedance matching phenomenon, where change from low to high velocity flows occurs and a directional change from lateral to axial rotational flow results. In the radiant flow systems of this model, whirlpools again are a phenomenon where lateral flow is transposed to axial flow as a spiral vortex that we call the magnetic line.
The Magnetic vortex has many characteristics comparable to Matter as shown in this list:
MATTER MAGNETISM Occupies space Repels diamagnetic materials and like poles. Interatomic binding Attracts opposite poles and magnetic materials. Inertia Inductance Spin Spiral form Weight ?? Captures Electrons Captures electrons in Spiral Changes polarization of light. Changes polarization of light via the Faraday effect Causes frequency dispersion via a prism Causes Zeeman effect splitting of spectral lines
The magnetic fields of galactic systems may be viewed as being similar in form to the system of hurricanes and their daughter tornadoes. The galaxy representing the mother magnetic vortex storm, with the planetary systems representing the first generation daughter vortex fields. The magnetic vortex fields of the planets are in turn, the daughters of the planetary system fields. This scenario suggests that the Earth's magnetic field may be independent of the Earth's matter. The prior existence of the magnetic field may have caused the collection and formation of the Earth within the field. The fact that the magnetic field poles of the Earth wander and reverse in relation to the mechanical poles, lends support to this concept.
There are suggestions in the literature, that our Sun orbits the magnetic center of our planetary system. With this model viewing magnetism as a soft form of matter, the large magnet structure of our Solar system may provide gravitational shadowing, and thus account for a share of the gravitational attraction toward the center and Sun. Is it possible that the apparent aberration of Mercury's orbit is due to the offset gravitational influence of the magnetic center?
The refraction of star light near the Sun may be caused by this magnetic system structure. As noted above, magnetism is known to interact with light, as demonstrated by the Zeeman and Faraday effects The starlight refraction may have no relation to, nor interaction with, the gravitational field of the Sun, or warped space systems.
Web page address URL http://home.netcom.com/~sbyers11/inertia.htm
Web site by: email@example.com