199 lines
9.7 KiB
Plaintext
199 lines
9.7 KiB
Plaintext
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
(word processor parameters LM=8, RM=75, TM=2, BM=2)
|
||
|
|
Taken from KeelyNet BBS (214) 324-3501
|
||
|
|
Sponsored by Vangard Sciences
|
||
|
|
PO BOX 1031
|
||
|
|
Mesquite, TX 75150
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
There are ABSOLUTELY NO RESTRICTIONS
|
||
|
|
on duplicating, publishing or distributing the
|
||
|
|
files on KeelyNet except where noted!
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
January 16,1994
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
SLOWTIME.ASC
|
||
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
|
This file is based on original research and shared with
|
||
|
|
KeelyNet courtesy of Bert Pool and Norman Wootan.
|
||
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Experiment on Time Dialation Effects
|
||
|
|
Reported to Occur With High Speed Rotating Masses
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Conducted by Norman Wootan and Bert Pool
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Hal Fox, editor of Fusion Facts, invited interested experimenters
|
||
|
|
to verify or refute a report that large spinning masses apparently
|
||
|
|
may affect time/space in the immediate vicinity of the spinning
|
||
|
|
mass.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Back in the 1960's, an unnamed experimenter reported that an
|
||
|
|
"Accutron" quartz movement watch would lose time at a rate of about
|
||
|
|
19 seconds for every 1,000 seconds of "near exposure" to a large
|
||
|
|
spinning mass such as a large generator rotor.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
We had no exact description of the spinning mass except that it
|
||
|
|
probably was steel or laminated iron - and we had no exact rotor
|
||
|
|
weight from which to work.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Physicists theorize that extremely massive objects such as black
|
||
|
|
holes can affect time in their immediate vicinity - could a much
|
||
|
|
smaller spinning mass also produce a measurable slowdown in time?
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Norm Wootan and I (Bert Pool) decided to conduct an experiment which
|
||
|
|
would help prove or disprove the alleged observation.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
During the months of December 1993 and January 1994, several
|
||
|
|
experiments were conducted using fairly large spinning masses.
|
||
|
|
Below is a description of the test apparatus used and the results
|
||
|
|
observed.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
First, a test device was constructed using an aluminum test mass of
|
||
|
|
31 pounds of aluminum disks stacked to form a rotor 8 inches in
|
||
|
|
diameter and 6 inches tall. The disks which were used to form the
|
||
|
|
rotating cylinder were precision aluminum computer disk platters
|
||
|
|
removed from surplus mainframe hard disk drives. The thin magnetic
|
||
|
|
oxide was left intact on the platters. The surplus hard disk drive
|
||
|
|
spindle provided an ideal bearing which could handle the mass and
|
||
|
|
speed we were to attempt in the experiments.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Page 1
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Since we had the aluminum disks ready-made, we decided to run our
|
||
|
|
tests with aluminum instead of steel for the mass.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Two quartz crystal controlled timebases were carefully chosen to
|
||
|
|
form a "test timebase" and a "reference timebase". Both were sealed
|
||
|
|
in solid copper foil Faraday shields to isolate the time bases from
|
||
|
|
external electromagnetic fields.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
One timebase designated as the "test base" was placed 1/32 inch away
|
||
|
|
from the edge of the spinning mass.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The second timebase, referred to as the "reference base" was placed
|
||
|
|
in a secure area ten feet away from the spinning mass. Care was
|
||
|
|
made to insure that the reference timebase was at least ten feet
|
||
|
|
away from all external sources of moving mass or electrostatic and
|
||
|
|
electromagnetic fields.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Previous testing had verified that the two timebases would remain
|
||
|
|
synchronized to better than 1/4 second per 48 hour test period.
|
||
|
|
This degree of synchronization is equal to better than 1 part in
|
||
|
|
691,000. Since we were looking for a reported slowdown of the
|
||
|
|
affected timebase on the order of 19 seconds in 1000, or 1 part in
|
||
|
|
52, this would provide us with more than adequate measuring
|
||
|
|
accuracy.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The 31 pound aluminum cylinder was spun up to a speed of 3,090
|
||
|
|
r.p.m.. For the first test, both timebases were placed in copper
|
||
|
|
shielding. The mass ran for 45 minutes, or 2,700 seconds.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The expected slowdown of the timebase near the spinning rotor was
|
||
|
|
postulated to be as much as 51.3 seconds (1/52 of 2,700 seconds).
|
||
|
|
The spinning mass was stopped and both the reference timebase and
|
||
|
|
the test timebase were removed from their Faraday shielding and the
|
||
|
|
displayed times carefully compared.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Absolutely NO loss of time was found to have occurred in the test
|
||
|
|
timebase compared to the reference base.
|
||
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
|
A second test was run using UNSHIELDED timebases. We expected that
|
||
|
|
the magnetic oxide coating on the platters might interact with the
|
||
|
|
electronics of the test timebase. This time, the mass was run at
|
||
|
|
3,090 r.p.m. for 12 hours!
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
At the end of the test period, the mass was stopped, and the
|
||
|
|
timebases were again compared. Absolutely NO loss of time was
|
||
|
|
measured in the test timebase.
|
||
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
|
We decided that perhaps the mass and inertia of the 31 pound
|
||
|
|
cylinder were not high enough. We set up the experiment again using
|
||
|
|
shielded timebases, but replaced the 31 pound, 8 inch diameter mass
|
||
|
|
with one which was 14 inches in diameter and over 66 pounds in
|
||
|
|
weight.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The driving motor was replaced with one twice the size of the
|
||
|
|
original. The mass was spun up to a maximum speed of 3,200 r.p.m.
|
||
|
|
(this was the maximum speed we could coax out of the motor with this
|
||
|
|
large load) and ran the experiment for 1 hour.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
The mass was stopped, and the timebases examined. As before,
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Page 2
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
absolutely NO loss of time was observed in the test timebase which
|
||
|
|
had been placed near the spinning mass.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Two additional timebases placed INSIDE of the spinning mass, near
|
||
|
|
the outer circumference of the platters, also did not show any
|
||
|
|
unusual time discrepancies whatsoever.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Conclusions: Shielded accurate quartz controlled oscillator
|
||
|
|
timebases are not affected whatsoever when placed in
|
||
|
|
very close proximity to large spinning masses of non-
|
||
|
|
magnetic aluminum. Even non-shielded timebases
|
||
|
|
showed remarkable stability over extended periods of
|
||
|
|
measurement in the experiment.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
We plan on conducting additional experiments in the near future,
|
||
|
|
using a larger rotor machined from steel instead of aluminum.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
We believe that the reported anomaly was most likely due to the
|
||
|
|
interaction of residual magnetic fields present in the original
|
||
|
|
steel rotating mass interacting with the electronics or tuning fork
|
||
|
|
within the original "Acutron" watch placed near the mass.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
During our experiment we may not have observed an effect showing a
|
||
|
|
measurable slowdown of time in our experiment because
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
(1) the effect may only occur with steel or other ferrous metal
|
||
|
|
rotors,
|
||
|
|
(2) our mass may have been insufficient,
|
||
|
|
(3) our rotor speed may have been too low, or perhaps some
|
||
|
|
combination of the above, or
|
||
|
|
(4) there very well may be no measurable effect on time by a
|
||
|
|
spinning mass constructed of any material, i.e. the
|
||
|
|
original observation was flawed or bogus.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
It is suggested that other researchers experiment with large
|
||
|
|
spinning masses to help determine whether in fact spinning masses
|
||
|
|
can affect the flow of time in space near the spinning mass. Our
|
||
|
|
initial tests lead us to believe that no such effect is taking
|
||
|
|
place.
|
||
|
|
Bert Pool and Norman Wootan
|
||
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
|
Vangard Note
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
An excellent experiment and report, despite the failure to
|
||
|
|
detect the reported time loss, the attempt is worthy of report
|
||
|
|
and congratulations. We look forward to additional experiments.
|
||
|
|
Thanks Bert and Norm!
|
||
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
|
If you have comments or other information relating to such topics
|
||
|
|
as this paper covers, please upload to KeelyNet or send to the
|
||
|
|
Vangard Sciences address as listed on the first page.
|
||
|
|
Thank you for your consideration, interest and support.
|
||
|
|
Jerry W. Decker.........Ron Barker...........Chuck Henderson
|
||
|
|
Vangard Sciences/KeelyNet
|
||
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
|
If we can be of service, you may contact
|
||
|
|
Jerry at (214) 324-8741 or Ron at (214) 242-9346
|
||
|
|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Page 3
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|