occasional meanderings in physics' brave new world
Marni D. Sheppeard
View my complete profile
Lieven Le Bruyn
Todd and Vishal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License
Web Page Counter
The AF Book
posted by Kea | 7:14 PM
Off topic comment: my only excuse is that I am a little bit happy. TGD based model for Flyby anomaly predicts the energy increment in flyby process. The prediction was qualitatively correct but about quantitative details I did not know. The reason was I simply could not force myself to purchase the article online: the price is really dirty, 25 dollars. Hence I decided to take the risk of ridiculizing myself in case that the prediction is only qualitatively correct. I got this morning the PRL article as email. The prediction was correct! I can safely predict that this is for TGD based view about dark matter what perihelion shift of Mercury was for general relativity. For the model see my blog.
Fantastic news, Matti.
Matti, thanks for your analysis of the flyby anomaly. You said in your web site material (blog and tgdgrt.pdf file): "... Authors suggest that the Earth's rotation is somehow involved with the effect. The first thing to notice is that the gravimagnetic field of Earth, call it BE, predicted by General Relativity is quite too weak to explain the effect as a gravimagnetic force on spacecraft ...The gravimagnetic force ... could explain this deformation as a kind of frame drag effect ... M. Tajmar and C. J. Matos ... have made an amazing claim of having detected strong gravimagnetism with gravimagnetic field having a magnitude which is about 20 orders of magnitude higher than predicted by General Relativity ...". If Tajmar-type gravimagnetism is a valid explanation of the flyby effect,then any physics model with such gravimagnetism would be an explanation, including conformal gravity models (like mine) would also have such an effect, and also variable-speed-of-light models (like Louise's) since the variable-speed-of-light can be formulated as varying light-cone-angles which in turn can be formulated in terms of conformal transformations. Such points of similarity among TGD, Louise's model, and my model are quite interesting. Tony SmithPS - For reference, I think that the work of Tajmar et al is at gr-qc/0603033 and gr-qc/0603032 and cond-mat/0602591and I am happy to note that de Matos and Tajman in cond-mat/0602591 actually cited in their references (along with some very interesting papers by G.A. Sardinashvily and one by Bluhm and Kostelecky) my pre-Cornell-blacklist papers at hep-th/9402003 and hep-th/9403007 .It is interesting to see that blacklisted work, such as Matti's TGD with gravitomagnetism and Louise's variable-speed-of-light and my conformal graviphotons seems to be capable to explaining experimental data better than the establishment consensus models that the sheeple of the physics community are compelled to follow rigidly under penalty of excommunication.PPS - This is a comment that I put earlier on Louise's blog, but now I don't see the post and comments on Louise's blog, so I am putting it here also since Matti made the same comment here.
The picture is cute! We can learn a lot by spending time with birds.
Thanks for the comment, Tony, and yes, Louise, a kea is too adorable to be shot, as they still occasionally are.
Well the kind of shot you took at the kea was totally acceptable IMO :)Cheers,T.
Hi Tommaso. It's not my photo. I don't actually own a camera. But it is a shot I might have taken.
Post a Comment