'Elastivity' of graviton collisions

I'm getting a bit ahead of myself as I am just nearing the end of the chapter of Pushing Gravity that Tom wrote (which is right in the middle of it) but this thread brings up the subject of heating and cooling via gravitons and the elysium and I am struggling to accept the concept of elysial convective cooling which seems at this point to be counterintuitive.

Let us say our zoomie impacts an atom in such a way as to be absorbed by it. Copious amounts of energy are transferred in the process. Our atom then experiences new motion in all of its degrees of freedom which we collectively term 'heat'. This atom is literaly rocking and rolling and shaking from the inside out. How could a medium exist that can accept transference of this motion but in no other way manifest itself such that we would be able to observe it? This elysium must need to be made of something to be able to absorb energy and move it around. Shouldn't I be able to measure the temperature rise adiabatically just like I can for a thermochemical reaction?

I'm sure the answer is coming up, but right now it seems to me to be a shaky premise.

Also, I have another thought on a related concept. Tom mentions below that a gravitational shield would provide a means of propulsion, the analogy being that of a wind sail. Conversely it seems to me that lensing emergent gravitons would also provide a mechanism for propulsion through the reverse mechanism to elysial convection - heat moving from zoomies into elysium then then back into atoms to fuel a heat engine.

Or does elysial interaction not obey thermodynamics or have I made a wrong assumption about the ability of gravitons to interact with elysium?

I may be back to correct myself once I get through the next couple of chapters. One thing that does seem to be intuitive is that radioactive decay must be a process driven by graviton absorbtion, which I realized as I was reading last night and which Tom basiclly says below, if I read him correctly.

What a book this is.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[Gregg]: If you raise the density high enough to utilize the wind, you have raised the mass of the sail. It sounds like a losing proposition: increased resistance to motion cancels out the increased capture of momentum. Or am I hare-brained?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Using the fish-net-sail analogy again, if you eliminated the porosity by adding many, many layers of fish net, you would have exactly the problem you describe -- the added mass to be propelled more than cancels out the added momentum.

However, my proposal was to increase matter density without increasing mass, like replacing the fish net sail with a fine silk sail. The goal is to just eliminate the porosity of the matter to gravitons.

So I consider the problem solved. It is now up to the "meat and potatoes engineers" to implement that solution. -|Tom|-

From a laymans point of view I must agree that the 'sail' idea has the problem that gravitons (or whatever we call them) comes from 'all' directions with all the same speed (assumption) thus any dense enough object to block gravitons in itself will not experience a net force in any direction. If we add a yacht (vehicle) to it the gravitons from the side of the 'sail' would be blocked and the vehicle should show a net force towards the sail side. This implies that the weight of the yacht is what will make the thing work. It will have to push the sail instead of the sail pulling it.
But, the yacht would (presumably) be build of ordinary 'stuff' and gravitons for the most part would fly straight through it. Thus, a graviton comming from the yacht's side of the sail could (potentially) fly through the vehicle, bounce of the sail and then hit the vehicle on the outwards path. In this way the vehicle could also experience zero net force in any direction.
Another possibility is to use some lensing effect as suggested earlier. That way at least the direction of gravitons 'could' be controlled causing some net force on a sail or vehicle.

That is why I asked earlier if there is any indication that another force (perhaps on another scale) can be use to manipulate gravitons.

Rudolf

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[dholeman]: Let us say our zoomie impacts an atom in such a way as to be absorbed by it. Copious amounts of energy are transferred in the process. Our atom then experiences new motion in all of its degrees of freedom which we collectively term 'heat'. This atom is literaly rocking and rolling and shaking from the inside out. How could a medium exist that can accept transference of this motion but in no other way manifest itself such that we would be able to observe it? This elysium must need to be made of something to be able to absorb energy and move it around. Shouldn't I be able to measure the temperature rise adiabatically just like I can for a thermochemical reaction?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Individual gravitons are something like 20 orders of magnitude smaller than baryons. So individual gravitons convey very little energy when absorbed.

The next chapter after mine by Slabinski shows the surprising result that gravitons must have a scattering coefficient 10^30 times larger than their absorption coefficient, which explains why the gravitational constant is as large as it is yet most of the heat is in the elysium and not absorbed by matter.

The detectability of the elysium depends on how interactive it is with matter. Mostly, elysium flows through matter without taking much notice. So that makes it hard to detect. It is comprised of units way smaller than quantum particles. Moreover, all the elysium of the universe must be near thermodynamic equilibrium with the graviton medium, absorbing, scattering, and re-emitting gravitons constantly. So the slight additional density of elysium near matter adds only a modest amount of additional heat to what "empty space" would have. Yet we calibrate our instruments to register that level of temperature as "absolute zero". However, our absolute zero makes no allowance for zero-point energy (vacuum energy), which is unknowably large and cannot yet be measured.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>lensing emergent gravitons would also provide a mechanism for propulsion through the reverse mechanism to elysial convection - heat moving from zoomies into elysium then then back into atoms to fuel a heat engine.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

In principle, sure, but the numbers seem to suggest very low efficiency. We need to build an elysium detector first.

You'll learn more about this subject in the September 15 Meta Research Bulletin, in an article specifically about gravitons, elysium, and a mechanism for exploding planets. -|Tom|-

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>From a laymans point of view I must agree that the 'sail' idea has the problem that gravitons (or whatever we call them) comes from 'all' directions with all the same speed (assumption) thus any dense enough object to block gravitons in itself will not experience a net force in any direction.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

We were not discussing a propulsion method for spacecraft, but rather a means of deriving free energy here on Earth. Earth is like the yacht attached to the sail. It blocks enough gravitons that there is always a net graviton wind blowing downward. With an ultra-dense-matter sail, we could use that wind for propulsion of other applications. Much like wind energy and solar energy, its not availably anywhere in the universe, but where it is available, its free and essentially unlimited energy. -|Tom|-

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[Tom]: We were not discussing a propulsion method for spacecraft, but rather a means of deriving free energy here on Earth.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
Sorry, I misunderstood.
I am familiar of things like thermo-couplings like the type of electical propulsion the voyagers and other spacecraft use. Sorry again but it seems I'm stuck on the vehicle idea.
But I have a question in terms of the graviton 'wind' blowing 'downward'. Is'nt this 'wind' comming from all directions? How will a detector or reactor be able to distinquish the direction of this 'wind' or the lack of it?

Rudolf