Prev: solutions book
Next: A new suggestion, about the new big linear accelerator thatis now being designed!!
From: Ken S. Tucker on 28 Jul 2010 21:02
When thermospheric effects are eliminated the 'frame drag'
nulls.
Ken

On Jul 28, 3:33 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 28, 11:00 am, "Ken S. Tucker" <dynam...(a)vianet.on.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 28, 5:07 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 28, 6:35 am, "Ken S. Tucker" <dynam...(a)vianet.on.ca> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jul 27, 10:00 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jul 28, 12:34 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Jul 27, 8:58 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Jul 27, 9:43 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On Jul 27, 6:16 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > On Jul 27, 7:13 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" <dynam...(a)vianet.on.ca> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Jul 27, 12:23 am, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Ken S. Tucker wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > [...]
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > MST eliminates artifacts (such as Frame Drag) and enables the
> > > > > > > > > > > > inertial
> > > > > > > > > > > > effects in the geodesic.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Ken, when are you going to stop lying about frame dragging?
>
> > > > > > > > > > You should avoid using pop-sci sensational articles to support
> > > > > > > > > > your thinking.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > You've been
> > > > > > > > > > > sourced on its' multiple independent observations many times over the last
> > > > > > > > > > > decade.
>
> > > > > > > > > > 1) It's NASA's conclusion (having spent $500,000,000 on GP-b),
> > > > > > > > > > in consultation with theoreticians, that 'frame dragging' cannot be
> > > > > > > > > > measured, I agree with that scientifically measured conclusion.
>
> > > > > > > > > > 2) Do you (Eric) know how to transform imaginary CS's to real?
> > > > > > > > > > If you do then provide a simple demo,
> > > > > > > > > > then following that predict 'frame dragging'.
> > > > > > > > > > Ken
>
> > > > > > > > > Frame dragging is a change in the state of displaced dark matter
> > > > > > > > > caused by the moving Earth.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > Energy does not drag space. It moves in it.
>
> > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch
>
> > > > > > > Frame dragging is a change in the state of displaced dark matter
> > > > > > > caused by the moving Earth.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > The Earth is a turning flow of energy in the round geometry of its own
> > > > > > gravity field. Anything that matter does cannot drag space.
>
> > > > > > Mitch Raemsch
>
> > > > > Frame dragging is a change in the state of displaced dark matter
> > > > > caused by the moving Earth.
>
> > > > There is no such thing as "frame dragging", AE attempted to use
> > > > the concept (religiously) from Mach's Inertial Conjecture, that
> > > > has now been completely discredited, but lives on in pop-sci.
> > > > Ken
>
> > > A bowling ball has millions of tiny holes throughout out it. The
> > > bowling ball rolls down a ramp in a tank of water. The bowling ball
> > > displaces the water as it rolls down the ramp. The water 'falls away'
> > > from the bowling ball as the bowling ball continues down the ramp and
> > > displaces different sections of water in the tank. This is what is
> > > described as 'frame dragging'.
>
> > Yes, I'm quite sure Gisse is enlightend, by that too,
> > if yous only knew how to bowl.
> > Ken
>
> 'Einstein's Warped View of Space Confirmed'http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/warp_space_041020.html
>
> <begin quote>
>
> "Earth's spin warps space around the planet, according to a new study
> that confirms a key prediction of Einstein's general theory of
> relativity. After 11 years of watching the movements of two Earth-
> orbiting satellites, researchers found each is dragged by about 6 feet
> (2 meters) every year because the very fabric of space is twisted by
> our whirling world. The results, announced today, are much more
> precise than preliminary findings published by the same group in the
> late 1990s.
>
> Frame dragging
>
> The effect is called frame dragging. It is a modification to the
> simpler aspects of gravity set out by Newton. Working from Einstein's
> relativity theory, Austrian physicists Joseph Lense and Hans Thirring
> predicted frame dragging in 1918. (It is also known as the Lense-
> Thirring effect.)
>
> Here's how it works:
>
> Any object with mass warps the space-time around it, in much the same
> way as a heavy object deforms a stretched elastic sheet, explained
> study leader Ignazio Ciufolini of the Università di Lecce in Italy. If
> the space around Earth is being frame-dragged, then satellites ought
> to be caught up in the deformation, scientists reasoned. Imagine how a
> second object on the elastic sheet would be moved by the scrunching
> motion created as the sheet is deformed. Ciufolini's team analyzed
> millions of laser signals bounced off two satellites, called LAGEOS
> and LAGEOS 2. Both are highly reflective spheres not designed to do
> any work of their own. They look like 2-foot-diameter (0.6m) golf
> balls and contain no batteries or electronics. The researchers say
> their result is 99 percent of the predicted drag, with an error of up
> to 10 percent. The details will be reported in the Oct. 21 issue of
> the journal Nature. The analysis is "the first reasonably accurate
> measurement of frame-dragging," said physicist Neil Ashby of the
> University of Colorado in Boulder."
>
> <end quote>
>
> The Earth displaces dark matter. The Earth spins, which is another
> displacement of the dark matter. The spinning Earth displaces the dark
> matter "in the same way as the elastic sheet would be twisted by a
> spinning heavy wheel on it."

From: Ken S. Tucker on 30 Jul 2010 10:35
On Jul 28, 5:47 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" <dynam...(a)vianet.on.ca> wrote:
> On Jul 28, 2:13 pm, "Paul B. Andersen" <some...(a)somewhere.no> wrote:

> > On 28.07.2010 01:13, Ken S. Tucker wrote:
....
> > > 1) It's NASA's conclusion (having spent $500,000,000 on GP-b),
> > > in consultation with theoreticians, that 'frame dragging' cannot be
> > > measured, I agree with that scientifically measured conclusion.
>
> > In which pop-sci sensational article did you read that?
> > The truth is that frame dragging was measured by GPB.
> > But you knew that, didn't you?
>
> Paul I respect your posts about SR's aberation, however
> that effect can be extended to GR, please see (and comment)
> on 'Modern SpaceTime' and down to 'MST & Kerr metrics',
> (it's just briefs),http://physics.trak4.com/
>
> I'm finding even pro GRists's don't understand the difference
> between a perihelion rotation and a 'frame drag' so I don't
> expect casual lay posters to spr to understand the distinction.
>
> Splitting hairs, NASA did measure 'frame dragging' and found
> it to be nil (in the noise), as we predicted.
> Regards
> Ken S. Tucker

To add, for NASA, the USAF, USN and the GPS system, orbital
navigation and guidance is a vital thing to know, and none
of them have detected 'frame dragging'.
Later we (C-Dyn) found the 'dragging' to be a CS artifact,
iow's a ghost.
Ken
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: solutions book
Next: A new suggestion, about the new big linear accelerator thatis now being designed!!