UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 1999 > Apr > Apr 7

Re: Krauss' Faulty Physics

From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 19:30:36 EDT
Fwd Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 22:54:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Krauss' Faulty Physics


>From: Jim Deardorff <deardorj@proaxis.com>
>Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 09:46:06 -0700 (PDT)
>Fwd Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 15:49:10 -0400
>Subject: Re: Krauss' Faulty Physics

>>From: David Rudiak <DRudiak@aol.com>
>>Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 18:24:11 EDT
>>Subject: Krauss' Faulty Physics [was: Friedman vs. Krauss Debate]
>>To: updates@globalserve.net

>>So how can large magnetic fields protect against high
>>accelerations? It doesn't require any new principles of physics
>>or speculation about 24th Star Trek physics or unknown
>>antigravity fields.

>>The principle that could make it possible is diamagnetism. ...

>>About two years ago, a rather dramatic demonstration of
>>diamagnetic effects appeared on the Net and media in the form of
>>the so-called floating frog experiment. A very strong 12 Tesla
  {Correction: should have been 16 Tesla}
>>laboratory SC magnet was used to levitate small creatures such
>>as frogs, fish, etc. Levitation depended on the principle of
>>diamagnetism, in particular the diamagnetic properties of water
>>in the animals. ...

>>Why was this experiment significant? Because it demonstrated
>>that with sufficiently strong magnetic fields, one could indeed
>>cancel the effects of gravity, not through any sort of
>>antigravity shielding, but by generating an opposing diamagnetic
>>force on molecules throughout the body of the animal. The
>>animal is then practically in a zero gravity state.

>David,

>I'm afraid we still need to invoke 24th-century, or make that
>54th-century, Star Trek physics. The strong magnetic field was
>merely opposing gravity, it wasn't opposing inertia.

Jim,

Inertial and gravitational mass are the same thing. In the
floating frog experiment, the earth is pulling on the frog with
a force that would cause 1g of downward acceleration. The magnet
is pushing the frog away with a force that would also cause 1g
of acceleration, only in the opposite direction. The net
acceleration is zero. The frog is weightless.

To avoid confusion, move the whole situation far out into space
and far away from any gravitationally attracting body. Now we
don't have to think of gravity, only inertial forces. If a
spacecraft moves at constant velocity, the frog floats
weightless in the spacecraft. If one now accelerates the
spacecraft, the frog will "fall" to the rear of the craft and be
pressed against the wall by the inertial forces. The frog now
has weight. As Einstein pointed out, in a local reference frame,
there is no way to distinguish between the force of gravity and
inertial forces produced by acceleration (his principle of
equivalence).

Now place the inertia compensating magnet between the rear wall
and the frog with a magnetic field that pushes the frog forward
using the diamagnetic force with exactly the same acceleration
as the spacecraft.  Since every atom in the frog is
simultaneously and equally accelerated (ideally), the frog again
remains weightless and feels no inertial force.

The key to inertia cancellation is the simultaneous equal
acceleration of every atom in the frog or astronaut's body. If
they are not equally and simultaneously accelerated, then there
is some squashing of the body. That's the situation an astronaut
is in if you simply strap him to his seat. He eventually gets
accelerated along with the rest of the spaceship, but only after
a delay. Furthermore, because of the finite delay, his backbone
is always a little ahead of his guts during acceleration, and he
gets flattened a little bit. It feels like an elephant is
sitting on his chest.

However, if the accelerating force is applied via a field, as is
the case with a magnet, all the atoms in the passengers body
move forward simultaneously at the same rate (ideally) and there
is no pressing of one atom against the other.  It's the exact
same situation as a group of objects in free fall in a
gravitational field. All fall at the same rate, so there is no
smashing of one object into another. The atoms of the astronauts
body all have equal acceleration, the astronaut feels no
inertial forces or pressure on his body, and everything remains
weightless.

In practice, a magnet will not accelerate every atom exactly the
same. Unlike a Star-Trekkian antigravity field, a magnet makes
an imperfect inertial dampener. Atoms further from the magnet
feel a smaller diamagnetic force. Different molecules composed
of different atoms will also generally not have equal
accelerations. (Which is not the case in a more ideal gravity
field where all mass is equally accelerated) Some such as oxygen
molecules and iron atoms would be attracted, not repelled.

Nonetheless, the vast majority of molecules in biological
materials are diamagnetic, the most important of these being
water, which makes up 70% of our body mass. Strong magnets would
provide protection against high acceleration forces. It wouldn't
be perfect, but perhaps a 40g acceleration would feel only like
8 g's (to pull numbers out of a hat), not confortable, but
certainly endurable for a few seconds during erratic maneuvers.

In addition, biological alien pilots could conceivably be
engineered to function at higher accelerations than human pilots
-- have bigger hearts, higher blood pressure, higher oxygen
carrying capacity to the blood, better return circulation
systems to prevent pooling of blood in the extremities, stronger
walled blood vessels, etc., etc., all designed to prevent
blackout. Lower body mass and more flexible, cartilagenous-type
bones, specially constructed pressure and support suits,
well-designed restraints, etc. might help prevent physical
injury. Through careful design, they might also be constructed
out of well-matched diamagnetic materials, to further reduce g
forces. So maybe with diamagnetic inertial dampening, 100 g's
would be reduced to 15-20 g's, which they could handle as well
as a human could take 8 g's.

Or one could dispense with biological pilots altogether and go
to computer, robot, or remote control, possibilities that Krauss
never considers in his straw man debunking. As Paul Hill pointed
out, we already have small guided missiles designed to pull
hundreds and even thousands of g's. Presumably advanced aliens
could design craft with comparable or better capabilities than
20th century humans. Maybe the hi-g UFOs observed are simply
unmanned (unaliened?).

David Rudiak


[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com