You are on page 1of 7

Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM) Practical modelling methods of the polarizable vacuum - III

Riccardo C. Storti1, Todd J. Desiato

Abstract
Engineering expressions are developed for experimental investigations involving coupling between electromagnetism and gravity. It is illustrated that an accelerated reference frame may be derived from a superposition of applied electromagnetic (EM) fields, and may be characterized by the magnitude of the Poynting vectors. Based on dimensional similarity and the Equivalence Principle, the engineered acceleration may be used to modify the gravitational acceleration “g” at the surface of the Earth. An engineered change in the value of the refractive index corresponds to an incremental change in the gravitational potential energy. The magnitude of this change and the similarity between an Experimental Prototype (EP) and the local gravitational environment, may then be characterized by a critical ratio “KR”, such that the gravitational acceleration is reduced to “zero” within a benchtop test volume, when KR = 1. An engineered refractive index equation is derived that may be used for EM metric engineering purposes. A hypothetical “engineered” Polarizable Vacuum (PV) metric line element is then presented as an example.

1

rstorti@deltagroupengineering.com, tdesiato@deltagroupengineering.com.

1

1 1.1

I TRODUCTIO DESCRIPTION

To demonstrate practical modelling methods of the Polarizable Vacuum (PV), utilising Buckingham's Π Theory (BPT), [1] experiments must be designed that test the hypothesis stated in [2]. Subsequently, three key design considerations were derived and may be characterised by two system regimes, i. The critical factor2 “KC”, which is a proportional measure of the magnitude of the applied Poynting vectors. [2] ii. The General Modelling Equations (GMEx). [2] (a) GME1 is proportional to a solution of the Poisson equation [3] applied to Newtonian gravity where the resulting acceleration is a function of the geometry of the energy densities. (b) GME2 is proportional to a solution of the Lagrange equation where the resulting acceleration is a function of the Lagrangian densities of the electromagnetic (EM) field harmonics in a vacuum. [4] 1.2 CRITICAL RATIO

Based on the principles of similarity, as defined by BPT [5-7], an engineering parameter termed the critical ratio “KR” has been formulated to indicate proportional experimental conditions (section 2.3). It is defined as the ratio of the applied EM fields, to the change of the gravitational field, in terms of the change in energy densities. In addition, it is shown that “KR” may be used to enhance the representation of the changing experimental relationship function “∆K0(ω,X)”, and leads to interactions with the PV, as illustrated in section 3 and 4. “KR” is a dimensionless parameter of the hypothesis to be tested as presented in [2]. 1.3 METRIC ENGINEERING

An engineered metric tensor line element is developed in section 5 utilising “KEGM” and the exponential metric tensor line element, as stated in the PV representation of GR. [8] In addition, a table of metric effects is articulated in section 6. 2 2.1 THEORETICAL MODELLI G MATHEMATICAL3 SIMILARITY

It has been illustrated in [1] that the magnitude of an acceleration vector field “a”, formed utilising BPT methodology, is equivalent to the magnitude of the gravitational acceleration vector field “g”, by dimensional similarity and by utilization of the Equivalence Principle. In the PV representation, this may be expressed as |n| → ∞ [2] by the more generalized form as follows,
K 0 ω 0, X ( n , k) . r 0 . K PV
3

E 0( k , n , t )

2

a r0

B 0( k , n , t ) ( n , k)

2

(1)

Where ω0, E0, B0 and r0 denote physical properties as the Refractive Index KPV →1 asymptotically, at infinity. The following table describes the terms used in this equation.

The orientation and intensity of the Poynting vector is commonplace functionality in many “off-theshelf” EM simulation products. This provides a convenient platform from which to design practical laboratory benchtop experiments. 3 All mathematical modelling and output was formed using “MathCad 8 Professional” and appears in standard product notation.

2

2

Variable a(r0) E0(k,n,t) B0(k,n,t) r0 ω0 n k KPV K0(ω0,X)

Description Magnitude of PV acceleration vector Magnitude of PV electric field vector Magnitude of PV magnetic field vector Magnitude of position vector 1. Field frequency 2. Independent scalar variable Harmonic frequency modes of PV Harmonic wave vector of PV Refractive Index [1] Experimental relationship4 function5 Table 1,

Units m/s2 V/m T m Hz None m-1 None None

By replacing E0 → EPV, B0 → BPV / KPV and r0 → r * √KPV, an engineered change in “g” may be expressed in local form that may be used to solve for the applied “E” and “B” fields as |nPV| → ∞ according to,
E PV k PV, n PV, t
2

∆g ≡ ∆a PV

∆K 0( ω , X ) r

.

n PV, k PV B PV k PV, n PV, t n PV, k PV
2

i

(2)

Such that, by application of dimensional similarity and the Equivalence Principle, the acceleration may be affected by an applied EM field as follows,
N E PV k PV, n PV, t n PV, k PV B PV k PV, n PV, t n PV, k PV
2 2

E A k A,n A,t nA= N N B A k A,n A,t
i

2

2

nA= N

(3) Units m/s2 m/s2 V/m T V/m T None m-1 None m-1 None None

Where, Variable ∆g ∆aPV EPV(kPV,nPV,t) BPV(kPV,nPV,t) EA(kA,nA,t) BA(kA,nA,t) nPV kPV nA kA i ∆K0(ω,X) Description Change of gravitational acceleration vector Change in PV acceleration vector Magnitude of PV electric field vector Magnitude of PV magnetic field vector Magnitude of applied electric field vector in complex form Magnitude of applied magnetic field vector in complex form Harmonic frequency modes of PV Harmonic wave vector of PV Harmonic frequency modes of applied field Harmonic wave vector of applied field Denotes initial conditions of PV Engineered relationship function Table 2,

Under ideal conditions of complete dynamic, kinematic and geometric similarity between the experimental configuration and the resulting acceleration, the experimental relationship function has a value defined in [1]. 5 “X” denotes all variables, within the experimental environment, that influences experimental results and behaviour. This also includes all parameters that might otherwise be neglected, due to practical calculation limitations, in theoretical analysis.

4

3

It shall be illustrated in section 3 that equation (2) may be utilized to develop an engineering solution. 2.2 CRITICAL FACTOR

An engineering solution with the PV can be further advanced by application of the critical factor “KC”. [2] It is a measure of the applied EM field intensity within an experimental test volume. It represents the square of the magnitude of the applied Poynting vectors as |nA| → ∞ for the local observer as follows,
∆K C ∆K 1 , ∆K 2
2

∆K 1( ω , r , E, D , X )

N 1 . E A k A,n A,t
2

N . nA= N B A k A,n A,t
2

∆K 2( ω , r , B, D , X ) K 2 PV n A = N

(4)

N ∆K 1( ω , r , E, D , X ) ∆K 0( ω , X ) . nA= N EA k A,n A,t
2

(5)
2

∆K 2( ω , r , B, D , X )

∆K 0( ω , X ) .K PV N

B A k A,n A,t nA= N

2

(6) Units V2/m2 T-2 None

Where, Variable ∆K1(ω,r,E,D,X) ∆K2(ω,r,B,D,X) D Description Change in experimental relationship function Change in experimental relationship function Experimental configuration factor6 Table 3, 2.3 CRITICAL RATIO

Practical engineering of the hypothesis to be tested may be possible by calculation of the critical ratio “KR”. This may be defined by consideration of the Equivalence Principle applied to equation (1) as |nPV| → ∞. Complete similarity occurs when |KR| = 1 and proportional similarity at |KR| ≠ 1, therefore it follows that “KR” may be used to represent the proportional relationships in terms of potential, acceleration and energy densities or any suitable measure as follows,
ε0 ∆U g ∆a PV ∆K C( ∆r ) . g Ug ∆U PV( ∆r ) µ 0

KR

(7)

Where, the permittivity and permeability of free space, “ε0” and “µ0” respectively, act as the impedance function7 and may be included to express “∆KC(r)” in terms of the energy density squared. Variable ∆Ug Ug ∆UPV(r) ∆KC(r) Description Change in Gravitational Potential Energy (GPE) per unit mass induced by any suitable source Initial state GPE per unit mass described by any appropriate method Change in energy density of gravitational field with respect to “r” Change in critical factor with respect to “r”. Table 4,
6

Units (m/s)2 (m/s)2 Pa PaΩ

The experimental configuration factor is a specific value relating all design criteria. This includes, but not limited to field harmonics, field orientation, physical dimensions, wave vector, spectral frequency mode, instrumentation and measurement error. 7 The impedance function “ Z = µ 0 /ε 0 ” is independent of KPV in the PV representation.

4

3 3.1

MATHEMATICAL MODELLI G ENGINEERING THE RELATIONSHIP FUNCTIONS

For experimental investigations, we require a model from which to design and predict behaviour in accordance with the hypothesis to be tested in [2]. In figure (1): (i) the arrows pointing downwards represent a uniform gravitational field, (ii) the arrows pointing upwards represent a uniformly applied system field, (iii) the black sphere represents the experimental test volume residing at co-ordinates (0,0,r) and (iv) the square section represents an EM flux area.

Figure 1, The hypothesis to be tested assumes coupling exists between EM8 and gravity such that the local value of “g” is reduced to zero and complete similarity is achieved as [|nPV|,|nA|] → ∞. Substituting c → ΣEPV2/ΣBPV2 into equation (2), solving for ∆K0(ω,X) and recognising that ∆aPV → g KR yields, r .g . G.M . ∆K 0( ω , X ) KR KR 2 2 c r .c (8) Hence, expressions for all experimental and engineered relationship functions have been obtained in terms of a scalar multiple of the magnitude of the resultant Poynting vector, [2] and the magnitudes of the superimposed EM fields which is commonplace functionality in “off-the-shelf” EM modelling software. 3.2 ENGINEERING THE REFRACTIVE INDEX

The hypothesis to be tested in [2] suggests that “KPV” [8] may be engineered in the same manner as “∆K0(ω,X)”. Equation (8) indicates that |KR| = 1 at complete similarity between the EP and the local gravitational field. At this condition, the magnitude of “∆KC/Z” is proportional to the magnitude of “∆UPV” at the surface of the Earth, within the test volume. It has been illustrated that “KPV”, in a practical laboratory benchtop experiment at the surface of the Earth may be represented as follows, [8]
2. G .M 2 r .c

K PV e

(9)

Therefore, an EM affected representation of “KPV”, may be expressed by the engineered Refractive Index “KEGM” as follows,
K EGM K PV. e
2 . ∆K 0( ω , X )

(10)

8

Refers to propagating transverse plane waves.

5

4

PHYSICAL MODELLI G

The mathematical construct herein is based on the modification of “g” by similarity, of the EP to the local gravitational environment. Subsequently, we may characterise physical modelling design criteria by the following engineering functions, Initial Value 0 0 0(V2/m2) 0(T-2) Key Characteristics Range: -∞ < KR < ∞ Range: -∞ < ∆K0(ω,X) < ∞ 1. 2. 1. 2. Configuration specific Determined experimentally Configuration specific Determined experimentally Engineered Solution
KR ∆U g ∆a PV ∆K C( ∆r ) ε0 . Ug g ∆U PV( ∆r ) µ 0

∆K 0( ω , X )

G.M . KR 2 r .c
N EA k A,n A,t nA= N
2

∆K 1( ω , r , E, D , X ) ∆K 0( ω , X ) .
∆K 0( ω , X ) .K PV N

2

∆K 2( ω , r , B, D , X )

B A k A,n A,t nA= N

2

0(PaΩ)2
2

0(m/s )

1. 2. 3. 1. 2. 3.

Change in Critical factor Configuration specific Key design consideration Change in GME1 Configuration specific Key design consideration [2]

∆K C ∆K 1 , ∆K 2

2

∆K 1( ω , r , E, D , X ) ∆K 2( ω , r , B, D , X )
N EA k A,n A,t
2

∆a 1( r )

∆K 0( ω , X ) 2 .r

.

nA= N N B A k A,n A,t nA= N
2

c

2

0(m/s2)

1. 2. 3.

Change in GME2 Configuration specific Key design consideration [2]

N EA k A,n A,t ∆a 2( r ) ∆K 0( ω , X ) 2 .r . nA= N N B A k A,n A,t nA= N
2 2

c

2

2.

g .r 2 c

|KR| = 1 Range: KPV ≥ 1 |KR| > 0 Range: KEGM > KPV Range: 0 < KEGM < KPV

2.

G .M 2 r .c

K PV e

e

2 .∆K 0 ω , X , K R

e

K EGM K PV. e

2 . ∆K 0( ω , X )

Normal Matter Form
K EGM e K PV
2 . ∆K 0( ω , X )

Exotic Matter Form Table 5, 5 5.1 METRIC E GI EERI G POLARIZABLE VACUUM

The exponential metric tensor line element in the PV model representation of GR in the weak field limit may be defined in Spherical Coordinates as follows [8],
ds
2 µ υ c .dt g µυ.dx .dx K PV 2 2 2 K PV. dr 2 2 r .dθ 2 2 2 r .sin ( θ ) .dψ

(11)

Where,
g 00 1 K PV

(12) (13)

g 11 g 22 g 33 K PV

6

5.2

ENGINEERED METRICS

The engineered metric tensor line element for weak field approximations using exponential components may be expressed as,
ds
2 µ υ g µυ.dx .dx 2 2 c .dt 2 K EGM. dr 2 2 r .dθ 2 2 2 r .sin ( θ ) .dψ

K EGM

(14)

Where,
g 00 1 K EGM

(15) (16)

g 11 g 22 g 33 K EGM

6

E GI EERED METRIC EFFECTS

Engineered metric effects may be represented for the “normal matter form” as follows, Variable Velocity of Light vc(KEGM) Mass m(KEGM) Frequency ω(KEGM) Time Interval ∆t(KEGM) Energy E(KEGM) Length Dim. L(KEGM) Determining Eq. vc = c / KEGM m = m0 * KEGM3/2 ω = ω0 / √KEGM ∆t = ∆t0 * √KEGM E = E0 / √KEGM L = L0 / √KEGM Table 6, KEGM > KPV (Engineered Metric) Velocity of light < c Effective mass increases Redshift toward lower frequencies Clocks run slower Lower energy states Objects contract

7

CO CLUSIO S

Engineering expressions are developed for experimental investigations involving coupling between EM fields and gravity that may be characterized by the magnitude of the superposition of the Poynting vectors. Based on dimensional similarity and the Equivalence Principle, the engineered acceleration may be used to modify the gravitational acceleration “g” at the surface of the Earth. An engineered change in the value of the refractive index corresponds to an incremental change in the gravitational potential energy. The magnitude of this change may be characterised by a critical ratio “KR” such that the gravitational acceleration is reduced to “zero” within a practical benchtop test volume when KR = 1. This leads to an engineered refractive index “KEGM” that may be used for metric engineering purposes. References [1] R. C. Storti, T. J. Desiato, “Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM) - Practical modelling methods of the polarizable vacuum – I”, http://www.deltagroupengineering.com/Docs/EGM_1.pdf [2] R. C. Storti, T. J. Desiato, “Electro-Gravi-Magnetics (EGM) - Practical modelling methods of the polarizable vacuum – II”, http://www.deltagroupengineering.com/Docs/EGM_2.pdf [3] G. Arfken, “Mathematical Methods For Phyisicists – Third Edition”, Academic Press, Inc. 1985 ISBN 0-12-059820-5. Ch. 1, pp. 77. [4] J.D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics, Third Edition, 1998, ISBN 0-471-30932-x, Ch. 6, Secs. 6.7-6.9, Ch. 12, Sec. 12.7. [5] B.S. Massey, “Mechanics of Fluids sixth edition”, Van Nostrand Reinhold (International), 1989, Ch. 9. [6] Rogers & Mayhew, “Engineering Thermodynamics Work & Heat Transfer third edition”, Longman Scientific & Technical, 1980, Part IV, Ch. 22. [7] Douglas, Gasiorek, Swaffield, “Fluid Mechanics second edition”, Longman Scientific & Technical, 1987, Part VII, Ch. 25. [8] H. E. Puthoff, et. al., “Engineering the Zero-Point Field and Polarizable Vacuum for Interstellar Flight”, JBIS, Vol. 55, pp.137-144, http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0107316, v1, Jul. 2001.

7