Antigravity Research

Hi John, no, still no reply from him. If I've made some howler of a mistake, then he will say so. if he just doesn't like the idea, he makes no comment at all.

I've had a skim through read of that pear you gave the link to on the other thread. I think I'll have to try and find the other paper by him, which is just on the maths of it.

First thoughts on it. He's found something extremely useful, he's not getting the expected feedback, so he piles everything but the kitchen sink into a paper. Not a good idea but perhaps understandable. One group of people who would have to have the paper brought to their attention, would be the people working on negative refractive index. But, who's paying their wages now.

So, how does this paper effect what we're talking about? I had the universe's "chassis voltage" set to the speed of light. Our sub light speed matter part of the universe was positive but negative in respect to this chassis voltage. I then said that the energy graph looks like that of a half wave rectifier. We live in the almost flat line part of this graph, a trickle reverse current available to us from the immense energy of the gravitational "voltage" of the graph.

So let's now plug in this guy's maths. We are now taking about negative mass which behaves itself. Over one cycle, we have a huge gravitational blip followed by a tiny little, almost flat line blip for sub light energy. This guy's new space concept goes underneath, into the neg xy region of our graph. It's out of phase and it's flipped, to allow for the reverse time flow.

That has to be of some importance, we have a loop formed, overall, no work done! Also, the almost flat line rectified part of this negative space cycle, is positive and lies directly under the positive huge gravitational blip.

I'll do a swift drawing of how it looks and get back to you with it. The upshot is that the two spaces occupy the same points but cannot destroy each other because they are out of phase. On the almost flat line part of the graph, energy transfer can occur, because each space is borrowing from its "same sign" half cycle counterpart.

Hi Stoat! Totally awesome graph! I saw your post late last night and taking another look at it this morning. The pinging of the graviton must be at extreme speeds, so I am guessing that this takes place internally in some particle pair that is in extreme rotation must be a hot plasma with fingers outstretched and a central twist that terminates in a self sustained annihilation at center between matter/antimatter pair, hmmm could be repulsive 90 degree forces generated and the reverse wave antigravitons could exit on otherside from a polar jet pulsed back into greater negative flow. The out of phase is necessary + sine wave crossing - sine wave in reverse direction, so yes half wave rectification takes place!!!...I will be back on this one in a few but this is hot! Will post more on isodual antimatter model & link too...Agree, those neg r.i guys working for the black project boys would be interested in this, John

Hi John, this take on things has got me totally confused now. The BEC aspects to this, cause h to become much much smaller. Great stuff, the electromagnetic mass of a particle can be uncertain; wavelike; whilst the gravitational mass knows where it is. The neg r.i. part of the set-up hides things. At a r.i. of minus one we could hide a planet from electromagnetic radiation but here we are talking about neg r.i.s of billions! They can hide mass! Yet this thing somehow communicates with its electromagnetic other half!

The BEC neg r.i core of Jupiter say, is shadow connected to the BEC neg r.i. core of the sun. yet the two cores don't have to be at the centre of their respective bodies, they are mass invisible, not forced to sit at the centre. So how does the ordinary mass know where it's inertial centre is? Eek!

What I'm toying with is the idea of any matter's space. Any bit of matter has its own "space."Half its energy goes to this, and it falls off as an inverse fourth power of the radius. Most ideas on what's it's "made" of suggest resonator pairs. Favourite being pairs of neutrinos (note this pairs and halves thing going on) Mass inside a neg r.i. BEC is going to have a "space" round it with some interesting properties. I'm totally culls as to what these might be. It's like one half of the universe is saying. "you wander off and be uncertain, while I be your inertial rock to run back to when you get frightened." Meanwhile the other half of the universe is saying exactly the same thing. [8D][]

Hi Cole, I've just been having a read of the pdf "NewFoundationPhysics.pdf" from that web site you mention. On first skim through read, it looks pretty good. I think we can adapt that. Have you thought of writing to them about the speed of gravity being faster than light? The estimate given here is 20 billion times c but I prefer 1 / 2pi * permitivity of free space as the muliplier (just under 18 billion times c). It would be interesting to hear their comments. Maybe give them the link to the paper on isoduality given by John as well.

Mind I'm not very happy with their creationist notions but sup with the devil if needs must [}][][8D]

Stoat,

A small correction here - 20 billion times c is not an estimate. It is a a constraint.

The speed of gravity is constrained, by observation of several binary pulsars, to be at least 20 billion times the speed of light. But so far we have no way to even make a reasonable guess what the actual speed might be.

I suspect it will turn out to be trillions of times faster than c, but I have only my intuition as a guide.

LB

(Partial text) A CLASSICAL ISODUAL THEORY OF ANTIMATTER
Ruggero Maria Santilli
Institute for Basic Research

"3.1 Fundamental assumption.

As it is well known, the contemporary treatment of matter is characterized by conventional mathematics, here referred to conventional numbers, fields, spaces, etc. with positive unit
and norm, thus having conventional positive characteristics of mass, energy, time, etc.

In this paper we study the following:

Hypothesis 3.1: Antimatter is characterized by the isodual mathematics, that with isodual numbers, fields, spaces, etc., thus having negative–definite units and norm. All characteristics of matter therefore change sign for antimatter represented via isoduality.

The above hypothesis evidently provides the correct conjugation of the charge at the desired classical level. However, by no means, the sole change of the sign of the charge is sufficient to ensure a consistent classical representation of antimatter. To achieve consistency, the theory must resolve the main problematic aspect of current classical treatments of antimatter, the fact that their operator image is not the correct charge conjugation of that
of matter, as evident from the existence of a single quantization procedure. It appears that the above problematic aspect is indeed resolved by the isodual theory. The main reason is that, jointly with the conjugation of the charge, isoduality also conjugates
all other physical characteristics of matter. This implies two channels of quantization, the conventional one for matter and a new isodual quantization for antimatter (see App. A) such that its operator image is indeed the charge conjugate of that of matter.

In this section we shall study the physical consistency of the theory in its classical formulation. The novel isodual quantization, the equivalence of isoduality and charge conjugation and related operator issues are studied in papers [5,10]. To begin our analysis, we note that Hypothesis 3.1 removes the traditional obstacles against negative energies and masses. In fact, particles with negative masses and energies referred to negative units are fully equivalent to particles with positive energy and masses referred to positive units. Moreover, as we shall see shortly, particles with negative energy referred to negative units behave in a fully physical way. This has permitted the study in ref. [10] of the possible elimination of necessary use of second quantization for the quantum characterization of antiparticles, as the reader should expect because our main objective is the achievement of equivalent treatments for particles and antiparticles at all levels, thus including first quantization. Hypothesis 3.1 also resolves the additional, well known, problematic aspects of motion backward in time. In fact, time moving backward referred to a negative unit is fully equivalent to time moving forward referred to a positive unit. This confirms the plausibility of the first conception of antiparticles by Stueckelberg and others as moving backward in time (see the historical analysis of Ref. [2]), and creates new possibilities for the ongoing research on the so-called ”time machine” to be studied in separate works. In this section we construct the classical isodual theory of antimatter at the Galilean, relativistic and gravitational levels, prove its axiomatic consistency and verify its compatibility with available classical experimental evidence (that on electromagnetic interactions
only). We also identify the prediction of the isodual theory that antimatter in the field of matter experiences gravitational repulsion (antigravity), and point out the ongoing efforts
for its future experimental resolutions .....

3.2 Representation of antimatter via the classical isodual Galilean
relativity......

In accordance with rule (2.26), the structure constants and Casimir invariants of the isodual Lie algebra Gd(3.1) are negative–definite. .....

...... The desired classical nonrelativistic characterization of antimatter is therefore given by imposing the Gd(3.1) invariance of isodual equations (3.3). This implies, in particular, that the equations admit a representation via the isodual Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics outlined in Appendix A.

We now verify that the above isodual representation of antimatter is indeed consistent with available classical experimental knowledge for antimatter, that under electromagnetic interactions. Once this property is established at the primitive Newtonian level, its verification at all subsequent levels of study is expected from mere compatibility arguments. Consider a conventional, classical, massive particle and its antiparticle in exterior conditions in vacuum. Suppose that the particle and antiparticle have charge #8722;e and +e, respectively (say, an electron and a positron), and that they enter into the gap of a magnet with constant magnetic field B. As it is well known, visual experimental observation establishes that particles and antiparticles have spiral trajectories of opposite orientation. But this behavior occurs for the representation of both the particle and its antiparticle in the same Euclidean space. The situation under isoduality is different, as described by the following:
Lemma 3.1: The trajectory of a charged particle in Euclidean space under a magnetic field and the trajectory of the corresponding antiparticle in isodual Euclidean space coincide.

Proof: Suppose that the particle has negative charge #8722;e in Euclidean space E(r, ,R),that is, the value #8722;e is defined with respect to the positive unit +1 of the underlying field of real numbers R = R(n,+,×). Suppose that the particle is under the influence of the magnetic field B. The characterization of the corresponding antiparticle via isoduality implies the reversal of the sign of all physical quantities, thus yielding the charge (#8722;e)d = +e

in the isodual Euclidean space Ed(rd, d,Rd), as well as the reversal of the magnetic field Bd = #8722;B, although now defined with respect to the negative unit (+1)d = #8722;1. It is then evident that the trajectory of a particle with charge #8722;e in the field B defined with respect to the unit +1 in Euclidean space and that for the antiparticle of charge +e in the field #8722;B defined with respect to the unit -1 in isodual Euclidean space coincide. q.e.d. An aspect of Theorem 3.1 which is particularly important for this paper is given by the following Corollary 3.1.A: Antiparticles reverse their trajectories when projected from their isodual space into the conventional space.

Lemma 3.1 assures that isodualities permit the representation of the correct trajectories of antiparticles as physically observed, despite their negative energy, thus providing the foundations for a consistent representation of antiparticles at the level of first quantization studied in paper [10]. Moreover, Lemma 3.1 tells us that the trajectories of antiparticles may appear to exist in our space while in reality they may belong to an independent space, the isodual Euclidean space, coexisting with our own space.

To verify the validity of the isodual theory at the level of Newtonian laws of electromagnetic phenomenology, let us consider the repulsive Coulomb force among two particles of negative charges #8722;q1 and #8722;q2 in E(r, ,R), F = K × (#8722;q1) × (#8722;q2)/r × r > 0, (3.10)
where the operations of multiplication × and division / are the conventional ones of the underlying field R(n,+,×). Under isoduality to Ed(rd, d,Rd) we have Fd = Kd ×d (#8722;q1)d ×d (#8722;q2)d/drd ×d rd = #8722;F < 0, (3.11) where ×d = #8722;× and /d = #8722;/ are the isodual operations of the underlying field Rd(nd,+,×d).

But the isodual force Fd = #8722;F occurs in the isodual Euclidean space and it is therefore defined with respect to the unit -1. As a result, isoduality correctly represents the repulsive character of the Coulomb force for two antiparticles with positive charges. The Coulomb force between a particle and an antiparticle can only be computed by projecting the antiparticle in the conventional space of the particle or vice-versa. In the former case we have F = K × (#8722;q1) × (#8722;q2)d/r × r < 0, (3.12)
thus yielding an attractive force, as experimentally established. In the projection of the particle in the isodual space of the antiparticle we have Fd = Kd ×d (#8722;q1) ×d (#8722;q2)d/drd ×d rd > 0. (3.13)

But this force is now referred to the unit -1, thus resulting to be again attractive. In conclusion, the isodual Galilean relativity correctly represent the electromagnetic in-teractions of antimatter at the classical Newtonian level.

The above novel property evidently assures that conventional relativistic laws for matter are also valid for antimatter represented via isoduality, since they share the same fundamental space-time interval.

....The reason why, after about a century of studies, the isoduals of the Galilean, special and general relativities escaped detection is that their identification required the prior knowledge of new numbers, those with a negative unit.

.....are then suggested for the study of interior gravitational problems of antimatter. It is instructive for the interested reader to verify that the preceding physical consistency of the isodual theory carries over at the above gravitational level, including the attractive character of antimatter-antimatter systems and their correct behavior under electromagnetic interactions.

Note in the latter respect that curvature in isodual Riemannian spaces is negative–definite (Sect. 2.7). Nevertheless, such negative value for antimatter-antimatter systems is referred to a negative unit, thus resulting in attraction. The universal symmetry of the isodual general relativity, the isodual isoPoincar`e symmetry ˆ Pd(3.1) #8776; Pd(3.1), has been introduced at the operator level in Ref. [6]. The construction of its classical counterpart is straightforward, although it cannot be reviewed here because it requires the broader isotopic mathematics, that based on generalized unit (2.39).

3.5 The prediction of antigravity.

We close this paper with the indication that the isodual theory of antimatter predicts the existence of antigravity (here defined as the reversal of the sign of the curvature tensor in our space–time) for antimatter in the field of matter, or vice–versa.

The prediction originates at the primitive Newtonian level, persists at all subsequent levels of study [10], and it is here identified as a consequence of the theory without any claim on its possible validity due to the lack of experimental knowledge at this writing on the gravitational behavior of antiparticles.

In essence, antigravity is predicted by the interplay between conventional geometries and their isoduals and, in particular, by Corollary 3.1.A according to which the trajectories we observe for antiparticles are the projection in our space–time of the actual trajectories in isodual space. The use of the same principle for the case of the gravitational field then yields antigravity. Consider the Newtonian gravitational force of two conventional (thus positive) masses m1 and m2 F = #8722;G × m1 × m2/r × r < 0, (3.31)

where the minus sign has been added for similarity with law (3.10).
Within the context of contemporary theories, the masses m1 and m2 remain positive irrespective of whether referred to a particle or an antiparticle. This yields the well known Newtonian gravitational attraction among any pair of masses, whether for particle–particle, antiparticle–antiparticle or particle–antiparticle. Under isoduality the situation is different. First, the particle–particle gravitational force yields exactly the same law (3.6). The case of antiparticle–antiparticle under isoduality yields the different law Fd = #8722;Gd ×d md 1 ×d md 2 /drd ×d rd > 0. (3.32)

But this force is defined with respect to the negative unit -1. The isoduality therefore correctly represents the attractive character of the gravitational force among two antiparticles.
The case of particle–antiparticle under isoduality requires the projection of the antiparticle in the space of the particle, as it is the case for the electromagnetic interactions of Corollary 2.1.A
F = #8722;G × m1 × md 2/r × r > 0, (3.33) which is now repulsive, thus illustrating the prediction of antigravity. Similarly, if we project the particle in the space of the antiparticle we have Fd = #8722;Gd ×d m1 ×d md 2/drd ×d rd < 0, (3.34) which is also repulsive because referred to the unit -1.

We can summarize the above results by saying that the classical representation of antiparticles via isoduality renders gravitational interactions equivalent to the electromagnetic ones, in the sense that the Newtonian gravitational law becomes equivalent to the Coulomb
law. Note the impossibility of achieving these results without isoduality.
The interested reader can verify the persistence of the above results at the relativistic and gravitational levels.

We should indicate that the electroweak behavior of antiparticles is experimentally established nowadays, while there no final experimental knowledge on the gravitational behavior
of antiparticles is available at this writing."

This was a partial review of research, here is link for full doc:

arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/pdf/9705/9705001v1.pdf

John Rickey