I've been looking into Richard Hoagland's notion of Hyperdimensional Physics lately. It's interesting because it explains quite a few phenomena
(sunspot cycles, the Great Spots on Jupiter and Neptune, to give just two examples) that our current paradigm struggles with somewhat.
And I came across two experiments that anyone can do, that would be a great project for a science class, and that produce results that seem to violate
the laws of physics as we know them and suggest that there's something else going on we haven't yet fully understood.
These experiments are both to do with rotation and angular momentum.
The first experiment is really simple.
- two ball bearings of identical size and weight
- an electric drill (modified as described)
- some sort of stroboscopic camera
Modify the electric drill so that it provides a cup which rotates to hold one ball bearing, and another cup, mounted on the (non-rotating) body of the
drill to hold the other ball bearing.
Set up the camera to capture what follows. It might be an idea to perform the experiment in front of a wall that you've marked with a grid of known
dimensions, for reasons which will become apparent.
If you can arrange it so that each ball bearing is a slightly different colour, that would also be useful.
Place one ball bearing in each cup. Spin the drill up so that the ball-bearing in the cup is rotating as fast as you can make it go, and stand in
front of the gridded wall.
Project the drill vertically upwards so that the ball bearings fly out of their respective holders. Use the stroboscopic camera and the gridded wall
to track their respective trajectories as accurately as possible.
According to the late Dr. Bruce DePalma (brother of the rather more famous film director Brian), the rotating ball-bearing will follow a markedly
different trajectory - flying higher and falling more slowly than its twin.
This is, put crudely, an antigravity effect arising from angular momentum interaction with the so-called torsion field, or, if you like, Maxwellian
ether. For the full story I'd recommend starting with this page
but you need to keep
reading to get to part 2
where DePalma starts to figure quite largely.
He seems like a really cool guy and seems, like so many others involved in the "alternative physics" arena, to have met an untimely death.
He also had another intriguing experiment which is linked here
. However, as so many of
these kinds of links disappear in a way I find rather suspicious, I'll give as much detail as I can.
Again, the crucial thing is rotating an object to build up its angular momentum. The more massive the object and the faster it spins, the higher the
But according to this experiment, strange effects occur from the simple act of spinning something at high speeds. Rather than reinterpret the
experiment, I'll cite the relevant part of the link I posted above:
In terms of the acceptance of a new body of information relating to the properties of rotating objects and variable inertia, a simple experiment
has to be devised which clearly demonstrates the new phenomena. In the performance of experiments with large rotating flywheels, there are great
experimental difficulties which result from experimenting on the large rotating flywheels themselves. Through a series of corroborating experiments it
has been established that the anisotropic inertial properties of a rotating object are conferred on the space around the object. That is to
say the space around a rotating object will have conferred upon it an inertial anisotropy. Let us ascribe this to the setting up of an od field
through rotation of a real physical object. The purpose of the experiment to be described is the determination of one of the properties of an od
field. The anisotropic inertia property.
The Experiment: A good way to detect a field whose effect is a spatial inertial anisotropy is to use a time measurement based on an inertial property
of space and compare it to a remote reference. With reference to figure ( 1 ) we have a situation where the timekeeping rate of an Accutron tuning
fork regulated wrist watch is compared to that of an ordinary electric clock with a synchronous sweep second hand.
The Accutron timepiece is specified to be accurate to one minute a month. Examination of the relative time drift of the Accutron - electric clock
combination shows a cumulative drift of .25 second Accutron ahead for 4 hours of steady state operation. This is within the specification of the
Figure 1 -- (see hyperlink below)
With the flywheel spinning at 7600 r.p.m. and run steadily for 1000 seconds (17 minutes), the Accutron loses .9 second relative to the electric
I thought I'd post the diagram in case the hyperlink goes down...
Obviously setting up the clock and watch and timing their divergence several times before conducting the experiment, to establish beyond doubt a
consistent pattern of divergence between the two tomekeepers, would be very important: that way you have a proper baseline against which to measure
any discrepancy introduced by spinning up the flywheel.
It seems as though the choice of a "tuning fork-driven" watch is important. Would other kinds of watches produce different results? What about an
ordinary mechanical timepiece?
I'm sure that many people here understand that these experiments feed directly into applications to do with free energy and antigravity: I think
they would be ideal school science projects that would really mess with teachers' heads.
Edited, firstly to put up the diagram from the hyperlink and then to correct a misinterpretation I'd made about the relative speeds of the two ball
[edit on 23-2-2009 by rich23]