Updating a link on Hackaday.io for Low Cost, Time of flight, gravitational imaging arrays



ResearchGate canceled their project support last year and I managed to save some things before they erased everything. I had/have a few dozen followers and collaborators.  I have been working on many things and still many different designs and things related to gravitational imaging.  But I am not making devices, only checking components.

Do you have any particular interest? It might be easier to summarize what you are interested in. I have been working on the gravitational potential field since 1970 and gravitational signal detection, imaging and communication since about 1978 (46 years).

I found so many different says to measure gravity. I am fairly certain many of the quantum computers are sensitive enough to pick up gravitational noise.  So I asked a few of those groups to save their noise in lossless format so I, or someone else, can correlate.  I have been looking at high sampling rate imaging sensors for several years now.  Recently I am working with LWIR infrared arrays.  My focus is on high sampling rates (MegaSps, GigaSps, TeraSps) so I can use array time of flight imaging correlation methods. I want to image the atmosphere in 3D as well as inside the Earth (volcanos and the core mantle interfaced.  And the oceans currents salinity and temperature. I know what to aim for, but simply do not have the skills now to make or afford some of the things.  A person with lots of money and younger eyes could do things.  I find data where I can, encourage groups, make videos, write comments, review papers, model and simulate, propose tests and ideas.

I am certain now that gravity at the surface of the earth has a complete gravitational spectrum with much of the power concentrated in the ultraviolet, extreme ultraviolet and soft x-ray.  But it stretches through and mixes with electromagnetic signals at all frequencies from nanoHertz through ExaHertz. Most of the transitions are dipole interactions and multipole, not simple waves. More flows and diffusion of the potential, and then the gradient of the potential makes detectable acceleration. The timing, frequency and alignment are very very specific, so it has huge power and tiny interaction probability.  In a fluid model it is nearly zero viscosity. At high power, many stable states are possible, including particle-antiparticle pairs.  That should be tested in the next few years with the vacuum laser expreiments and the fusion groups.  The gravitation energy density is roughly equivalent to the conditions inside fusion experiments, so I ask those groups to record noise and fluctuations over time. Some of those are likely externally triggered. And some will match the sun moon tidal and solar mass ejection events.

Richard Collins, The Internet Foundation

Richard K Collins

About: Richard K Collins

Director, The Internet Foundation Studying formation and optimized collaboration of global communities. Applying the Internet to solve global problems and build sustainable communities. Internet policies, standards and best practices.

13 thoughts on “Updating a link on Hackaday.io for Low Cost, Time of flight, gravitational imaging arrays”

  1. Researchgate doesn’t delete anything??? That would be weird.

    Other then that, its’ really hard for me to understand what you are talking about again here. I think it would be wise to build on one document, use formulas diagrams, statements/goals. etc to clarify your thinking / objectives / work / ideas. Sorry to be so brass, and of course my limited knowledge isn’t helping (can’t even find out how to make a Zero Length Spring aka Lacoste-Romberg), but if you are a nucleus of knowledge, the seed of it better be pristine.

    1. Last February I got notes to back up my projects on ResearchGate. Then in March they quit supporting “projects”. I thought it was rather strange but I cannot fix every site or help all groups. I find links in PDF papers where people had linked to their projects and those are all broken now. I thought it was a big mistake on their part, but programmers and even new people can modify or destroy what others have set up, just by having access to the computer. It is not uncommon for a person in a large organization to waste millions of hours for a corporation by changing and email wording or a link by mistake. Many systems are very fragile that way now. Not quite “a house of cards” but often very close to that.

      Yes, I am trying to document things I have one with equations, models, and simulations. Then I find large organizations making huge mistakes (all the AI companies and groups now). So I put my time an efforts toward that. Keeping the world running and 8 billion humans safe and living usually takes precedents over flying cars and 3D imaging the interior of the earth.

      For anyone reading this, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucien_LaCoste



      I have never built a zero length spring. A flat spiral spring not a cylindrical one.

      Details of how they did it are at https://www.utphysicshistory.net/LucienLaCoste.html

      Making a complicated spring to save a few lines of computer code is probably not the way to go.

    2. I have been working on the Internet Foundation every day for the last 25 (this is the 26th) years. I am old and tired and have been fitting gravity into my spare time. I try to get data in a form I can use from many places. I tried to convince LIGO to share their sensor data that is now aimed to remove all earth based data and instead model it precisely, use that to monitor earthquake seismic waves in real time in 3D globally. But it is much easier to use MEMS, Bose Einstein, Quantum, Atom Interferometer, Mossbauer, electrochemical, atomic clock, tensor gravimeter and other sensors instead of kilometer sized single axis detectors. Robert Forward had a lot to do with getting LIGO going, but I think they did not give him and Joe Weber sufficient help. When someone makes a mistake, you help them, not rail deride and kick them.

  2. So I would love to make cheap, simple, stable gravimeters without the need for advanced physics / math degrees. I like the idea of MEMs, but they seem to drift at the moment, though they are improving. I also think its too bad they are not open source, working with industry. I like the idea of using carbon nano tubes some how (more stable material/less drift) but how? Swing them, vibrate them, hang on them? Would it even work. I like the idea of using mainsprings, of clocks/watches some how (less drift??? within a range)… They seem so sensitive to movement and change, though remain fairly robust within a range of movement? Not too sure how.

    Anyway, my 2ct. Secondary goal, would like to help indigenous/stranded peoples/cultures/groups via an NGO, supporting there need to gain more control over their surroundings by understand the geology better. Know what is where, mines, petroleum fields, caves, etc… So its a social goal, giving them more stake / control.

    1. I learned a lot by looking closely at drifting in MEMS gravimeters.That is why I have been recommending for many years that groups starting to make their own gravimeters and gravitational 3d imaging detectors start with MEMS gravimeters, but calibrate them first using the vector sun moon tidal signal that superconducting gravimeters pick up as their main signal. I made videos about it, and tried to interest groups to go that way. Once you see that solar system gravity – day by day, second by second is linear and simple – lock cheap sensors to a global standard and calibrate continuously. Think of it as machine learning – over time you gain more experience and data on smaller and smaller signals. On Twitter I put some links.

      Mining is mostly a difficult industry to start. Geophysics and exploration is not for the faint-hearted. But I see drone based gravimeters and drone based gravity gradiometers starting. You might want to pick countries you have a heart for, including people in your own country, and devote your time to seeing what they need, who is trying to help, and simply lower the cost of finding things on the Internet.

    2. I wrote an answer and forgot to save. The MEMS can be calibrated using the sun moon vector tidal signal which is a LARGE signal. That set it continuously (every hour, every ten minutes, every day) and locks to the sun and moon. When I wanted to use the whole array of superconducting gravimeters as a single instrument to measure the speed of gravity – the stations were all having to be individually calibrated. A Linear regression is all that is needed to calibrate each axis against the sun and moon signal. That is ONLY dependent on the JPL Horizons system model – needs position of the sun and moon and earth over time, the position of the station, the rate of rotation of the earth, GM for sun moon earth. I used WGS84 ellipsoid and (in the most recent version) used browser based Javascript to do the linear regressions. it works for broadband three axis seismometer – ALL THREE AXES. So that locks things down even more. It is possible to solve for the orientation of the sensor, if that this not known, so not only could a MEMS gravimeter be low cost, it would solve for position of the gravimeter and its orientation in absolute space (earth center coordinate or North East Vertical at the station location. That works under the ocean, inside case and shielded facilities and vessels. I call it “gravitational GPS/GNSS” and “gravitational compass”. There are limitations with cheap tools, but there are time of flight gravitational methods now. For gravitational imaging with arrays, time of flight passive correlation imaging — record at Gsps (Giga samples per second) and Tsps (Tera sps) and then correlate the array to focus on specific voxels. I want to do that for the core-mantel boundary and under active and older volcanoes. Also 3D imaging the whole atmosphere and oceans since one can solve for temperature, density and velocity.

  3. Was wondering, can you use quantum theory/bits and bobs of some sort as a very precise trigger.. for an array of sensors/sources

    So you know how you can split light up into different parts. Untriggered they remain XYZ at the same time and can be moved to different locations and so on. Until you resolve them some how, by “looking at” one part, revealing the others. Was wondering if that might help your timing issue somehow for array technology. But perhaps there are better ways to deal with that.

    1. Much of quantum theory derives from spectroscopy. The states of atoms are fairly simple, because they are fairly simple themselves. Precise frequencies of atomic transitions of various sorts are used in atomic clocks, frequency references, atom interferometer based gravimeters. It is very likely that the the “quantum computer” components can be made sensitive enough for groups to use for directly detecting changes in gravitational potential, or by measuring its gradients. The advances in time of flight devices in just a few years, for low cost 3D camera, radio frequency array focusing and detection — mean that low cost sensor arrays capable of measuring 3D maps of electromagnetic, acoustic and gravitational fields are making such techniques accessible to more and more people and more and more countries. Many of the things that I thought would be labeled “gravitational” turn out to be “electromagnetic” when you take account of fields emitted by large complex 3D sources.

    2. Prisms and gratings are the usual ways to create a rainbow starting from a mixture of colors. A visible spectrum.

      But there are countless frequency specific filters, reflecting surfaces and more patterns. Instead focus on what you want to do, and then keep at it.

      “unstable” systems like magnetic levitation can be made stable with faster feedback. An infinite speed robot can balance a large mass balanced on a stick, even it it is unstable. Kids do this all the time balancing a broom on their hand. There are robots that do it, to walk upright.

    1. The piezo devices can be used as sensors, or to move a surface by very small distances. The latter is useful for photon interferometry at many frequencies. As detectors piezo sensors can be adapted for seismometry, and using multiple ones might be extended to 3D.

    2. I started studying gravitational energy density because Joe Weber told me to follow what his collaborator, Robert Lull Forward, was doing. Joe Weber used piezo sensors, which I was already familiar with then (1978). I knew his electronics and computer processing was not sensitive enough and not enough data to do what he wanted (to use it for gravity based communication systems with 3D and phase encoded fields).

      February 8, 1967: Joseph Weber submits first gravitational wave paper to PRL

      Here is Joe Weber in his lab as I remember him – you can see the piezo sensors he is working on, and the kind of amplifiers and signal recording he was doing in the background. I worked in a biology lab in 1968 to measure electrophysiology of hydra, so I was very familiar with operational amplifiers small voltage time series, recording data and then plotting and analyzing (10 years before I met Joe Weber and he gave me a tour of his lab)

      Rober Lull Forward – it does not mention that he showed how to calibrate gravitational detectors with lab based gravitational sources, which can be as simple as masses on a turntable. There are detector sensitive enough to measure the speed of gravity now using those small signals. I also worked out how the use cars and trucks on the highway, or larger masses, or ocean surf waves as conventient sources for gravitational wave. I was working at the time with Steve Klosko at Wolfe Research and Development to use satellite orbital analysis, satellite altimetry, radar and lazer tracking of satellites (and to target them) to model the spherical harmonic representation of the earths gravity field.

      When I saw Roberts dipoles and description of how changes in the gravitational potential at the masses diffuses (at the speed of light) to the detectors, and then the detector measure the time variation of the gradient of the potential – it was instantly clear how to use those. About 20+ years ago, I used the superconducting gravimeters and confirmed the speed of gravity, and also came to understand that gravity was diffusing and most of the gravitational potential was already in place, and only a little needed for updating. For three axis seismometers used to measure acceleration (g = dv/dt) in three axes — the vector tidal gravitional acceleration at a station is linear in all three axes. So only 6 numbers (an offset and multiplier) for each of the 3 axes, is needed. Since then in recent years I know know that the speed of light and gravity are identical because they are part of one underlying potential field and most “gravity” is just electric, magnetic and electrodynamic fields from multipole sources. I am checking the LWIR, XUV and soft x-ray parts for see where tight encoded beams of multipole radiation can be generated, and I am fairly certain that “neutrinos” can be modeled as complex path conserving solitons.

      My original passion was chemical imaging – now I am looking how to calculate gravitational variations in G because of the materials of experiments for big B and other things. It is isotope dependent. But for everyday levitation and control of fields to move and compress and shear things — ordinary induction — with complex circuits and sources and new materials – is “Let the AIs do it, and force the AIs to memorize the methods exactly and show their work” So I am trying to work out how to lift the SpaceX and Indian and other payloads to mission orbits and velocities — using ground based field generations of sufficient power. It took me most of my life and the last 25 years of the Internet Foundation to learn how to standardize ALL human knowledge so it can all be done on the computer – so any one person or group can pose complex problems and work then out to “digital twin” precision, indistinquishable from “real”.


      1. Sorry Richard,

        this is all very hard to follow.

        Vector tidal gravitational acceleration is linear? But it oscillates because of the position of the moon/sun? Otherwise it would go to zero, or increase indefinitely.

        Can you talk / type to me like I’m 5, or 13. No point in all this typing if it doesn’t lead to understanding.

        I like the idea of using the moon/sun/earth cycles to estimate expected gravity values. This may lead to an expected value of gravity at any position, height, mountain slope, on land or sea? From there you could chart deviations from this reference value (flat land, desert, no water in the subsurface?) as an indication of increases or decreases in density of the earth?

        As for arrays to judge gravity from a distance, I suppose its possible, just like seismic surveys. But that’s a bit next level for me to comprehend at the moment, math wise and so on. Something about inverse modelling etc etc.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *