Date: Sun Feb 14 1993 13:05:00 To: Jacques Poulet Subj: Fsr UFO - On 02-11-93 JACQUES POUL

---
Master Index Current Directory Index Go to SkepticTank Go to Human Rights activist Keith Henson Go to Scientology cult

Skeptic Tank!

Date: Sun Feb 14 1993 13:05:00 From: Mark Harris To: Jacques Poulet Subj: Fsr UFO ------------------------------- On 02-11-93 JACQUES POULET wrote to ALL... JP> Hi everyone! JP> JP> I was catching up on my reading list last week, and I found a very JP> interesting article in the FSR (Flying Saucer Review) (Autumn, 1992) by JP> R.D. Pearson, BSc. (Eng.) titled "ARE UFOS COMPATIBLE WITH 'OUR' PHYSICS?" JP> JP> From my limited knowledge of physics, what he describe _seems_ JP> logical. But I'd like those echoers that are grand masters in that JP> kind of stuff to give their opinion. JP> JP> I first need to know if anybody have heard about these: JP> JP> "...two physicists, Champeney and Moon, carried out an experiment on a JP> rotating bar. A time-dilation effect predicted from relativity did not JP> appear." Hi, Jaques; I don't know if I'm a 'Grand Master' of physics, but I generally can hold my own. Just as a little caveat, if a person doesn't understand the math, or it is not provided for examination, it's very easy to lay out all kinds of "plausible" sounding ideas which are just crap. Most of what you quote here I've run into at one time or another, and most of it is nonsense, in terms of the physics we have today. It is not likely that any reasonable modification of current theories will allow these items to suddenly make sense, either. Sigh. I often wish that were not the case. The time dilation effect described above was originally thought to be evident around a structure called a Tipler cylindar. That's a really, really huge structure, extremely dense, perhaps made of neutronium, spinning along its long axis in space, at a speed near the speed of light. Near the spinning surface, it's been shown that some interesting effects based on relativity *may* make themselves evident. The experiment you listed used a cylindar made of lead, spinning far, far below the speed of light. Most responsible researchers dismissed the experiment due to the fact that the predicted effects were several orders of magnitude below anything our instruments could detect. It's not a practical experiment, as things stand now. JP> "...in the 1980s an experiment by Alain Aspect showed that particules JP> called 'photons', which are carriers for the energy of light, affected JP> each other instantly regardless of separating distance." This is partially true. One of the implications of quantum mechanics states that if you change the spin of one of a pair of simultaneously emitted photons, the other will change its spin to match. This has, indeed, been measured as described, though there is some question about just how valid the experiment is. For example, does it hold true for photons whose path extends to relativistic distances? This would be where the expansion of the universe, given mathematically as the Hubble constant (thought to be about 75 kilometers per second per megaparsec of distance), exceeds the speed of light. At or near that point, there's a really neat and elegant modification of the math that shows that the expansion stays below the speed of light at those distances. But I digress. It isn't known if the effect is purely local, within the same frame of reference, or if it truly ignores the space/time continuum, and is instantaneous over any distance. Cool, interesting stuff I'm still thinking about. JP> "...Silvertooth,has carried out an experiment which showed the ether JP> exists after all! He pointed out that the speed of light is equal to JP> its wave frequency multiplied by wavelength. Michelson and Morley had JP> assumed wavelength to be fixed and in effect only measured frequency JP> changes." Well, er, no. Michelson and Morley' math was correct, and what Silvertooth proposed is absurd, mathematically. Also, it has been shown that he bases his conclusion on a single run out of many which was the flawed one. His instruments gave a faulty reading; there is no ether, and no indication that there even might be one. JP> He then goes on describing another theory (called the COMPUTING JP> GRID) that would include all the present ones, and: JP> JP> "The grid can support several interpenetrating systems of matter which JP> are normally invisible to one another." JP> JP> Very interesting concept from which the author pretend that both JP> kind of UFOs are possible: those from other dimensions or from another JP> distant world in this dimension. I've heard of a set of algorithms for super computers described that way; it was originally written to help solve some of the problems involved in the Superstring theory of the cosmos. Certain solutions generated so far seem to indicate that several universal systems can co-exist, overlapping dimensionally, but none of those solutions reflect the laws and structure of the universe we can observe. They have been rejected for that reason; any model, to be considered successful, must accurately describe the universe we can observe. I hope this was helpful to you; as I'm beginning to do more and more, please take note that I don't intend this reply to be in any way condescending or a put down. This is just my way of explaining these things, and no insult whatsoever is intended. Point in fact, thank you for posting these items; it seems that such pseudo science is constantly making the rounds, and I appreciate the opportunity to correct the image. After all, this is all confusing enough without having flatly wrong theories and experiments messing with our heads. Regards, Mark R. Harris ... OFFLINE 1.50 " Me a Skeptic? I trust you have proof...." --- MsgToss 2.0d(beta) 12/17/92

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank