Re: Uncle Al STOP!!!
From: Uncle Al (UncleAl0_at_hate.spam.net)
Date: 07/26/04
- Next message: Uncle Al: "Re: Car Bombs vs Human Beings (physics, physiology thereof)"
- Previous message: George Hammond: "Re: GOD=G_uv INVISIBLE WORLD"
- In reply to: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\): "Re: Uncle Al STOP!!!"
- Next in thread: Mark Tarka: "Re: Uncle Al STOP!!!"
- Reply: Mark Tarka: "Re: Uncle Al STOP!!!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 08:29:38 -0500
"N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)" wrote:
>
> Dear Uncle Al:
>
> "Uncle Al" <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
> news:410425F7.8E0DBC9C@hate.spam.net...
> > "N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc)" wrote:
> > > You didn't ask for mine, but I'll give them to you anyway. ;>)
> > > If gravitational mass = rest mass, then he may have more "moles" in one
> > > test body than the other. In other words the chirality may "hide" some
> > > mass. How would one assure that the same "count" of constituents is in
> all
> > > the test masses?
> >
> > It's a matter of decoupling inertial mass from gravitational
> > mass, dependent upon parity-pair lattice geometry. 400+ years of
> > Equivalence Principle testing have shown, now to 1 part in ten
> > trillion difference/average, that all chemical compositions fall
> > identically in vacuum. The number of atoms is irrelevant.
> > Photons fall to spec, so do neutrons.
>
> What if each test mass has a significantly different number of
> atoms/molecules, which arrives at the same geometry or net mass? What if
> the chirality is already "in effect" before you even mount them? I'm not
> saying it shouldn't be done exactly as you have laid out. But could you
> deconstruct the masses afterwards, and assure that an equal number of
> atoms/molecules were involved in each? To within some margin of error, of
> course.
A quartz crystal is a single molecule. A single neutron falls
identically to a tungsten billiard ball, local and in vacuum.
Chirality and parity are geometrically defined by the lattice
structure of the single crystal test masses. Enantiomorphic
space groups P3(1)21 and P3(2)21 exist independent of unit cell
contents.
Trival proof: Tellurium in P3(1,2)21 has three atoms in its unit
cell. Three atoms define a plane. Three atoms cannot be chiral
in 3D - a minimum of four non-coplanar atoms are required. Why
don't you look up the crystal structure of tellurium and see how
the unit cell pulls it off? To meet requirements of DSI=0 and
COR=1, twelve isolated points will definitely do it and possibly
eight. Lattice structures do not have those discrete
constraints.
The test masses of each hand will be carved from a single crystal
z-bar of cultured alpha-quartz, not including either the surface
or the seed plate. Grade B or better. They will be identical in
every dimension to within microns. Where is the slack, boy?
> And we are, for the most part, proud of your efforts, and in getting this
> experiment "on the boards". I'm thinking ahead to the branch of reality
> where a null result is obtained.
Metric theories of gravitation will give a null result, affine
theories of gravitation will not. A non-null result merely
falsifies General Relativity at its Equivalence Principle
founding postulate and tosses out about 80% of M-theory, loop
quantum theory, and any other theory with tensors symmetric to
parity inversion. It would clean things up marvelously while
leaving a residue of perfectly good existing theory to carry on.
GR will remain as a calculationally convenient heuristic - but
not for the parity case.
The universe enforces bold broad symmetries to create a robust
framework. It then has local symmetry breaking to create
interesting content. If I were the universe, gravitation would
have a parity anomaly to keep things interesting. We'll see.
-- Uncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
- Next message: Uncle Al: "Re: Car Bombs vs Human Beings (physics, physiology thereof)"
- Previous message: George Hammond: "Re: GOD=G_uv INVISIBLE WORLD"
- In reply to: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\): "Re: Uncle Al STOP!!!"
- Next in thread: Mark Tarka: "Re: Uncle Al STOP!!!"
- Reply: Mark Tarka: "Re: Uncle Al STOP!!!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|