Magnetic rotation, magnetic currents, gravitational engineering, Starships and acceleration fields

Faraday Paradox Solved! He was correct – the field does not rotate with a rotating magnet.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kl0-sKbZsKM

It was hard to follow you. But I liked your emphasis on the D orbitals. Generally, there is a large range of “magnetic quantum numbers” and many situations where orbitals have unpaired electrons. The D and F orbitals are common ones, but groups are making combinations of elements and molecules – searching widely to find materials with stronger fields.

. Where lasers and strong fields are used to ionize or change states, temporary or “metastable” or “transient” magnetic fields and forces are possible. In what is called “high harmonic gain” experiments, high energy density infrared lasers are used to produce fields in the extreme ulltraviolet and soft x-ray region. And those have associated magnetic fields that are in the 10s and 100s of Tesla.

I started studying strong magnetic fields in the 100s of Tesla, then KiloTelsa (thousands of Tesla), and MegaTesla (millions of Tesla) because Robert Lull Forward wrote about the gravitational energy density. When I calculated the magnetic field needed to match the energy density of the Earth’s gravitational field, it comes to about 380 Tesla. I met Joe Weber (University of Maryland College Park) about 1978 and the recommended I study Robert’s work rather than follow him. So that was 46 years ago. I wrote an essay for the Gravity Research Foundation about that about 1981. So over the decades I gradually found every possible place where these high energy densities are found. In fusion experiments, inside stars, inside planets, in particle collisions, in radioactive decay, with strong electric fields, in strong electromagnetic fields.

In fusion experiments, if you want “Mr Fusion” sized devices, it is necessary to use laser driven high magnetic fields, and to work with strong magnetic fields that are “quasi-stable” for times like nanoseconds. You are probably familiar with femtoSecond lasers. A million femtoSeconds is 1E6 * 1E-15 seconds = 1E-9 second = 1 nanoSecond. And a nanoSecond now is a LONG time in computers and measurement world. So you make fields that last a whole nanoSecond and you have a million femtoSeconds to play with. The AIs and computers can model those things precisely. Either get powerful GPUs or many computers with many cores and let them run.

Your argument about the magnetic field not turning is not completely correct. Look up the “Sagnac effect”, and “ring laser gyros”. Or look for “relativistic” “magnetism” “electric field” and you will find a litany of discussions and presentations where people argue that electric and magnetic behaviors depend on your sensor and how fast you move. If you magnet is axially symmetric, you might find it hard to measure the changing magnetic field. But search ( “rotational” “Barkhausen” ) and you will see discussion of rotational Barkhausen noise which is measurable where the magnetic domains are changed with the sound waves, electric and magnetic and heat and pressure in the solid lattice. For the Internet Foundation, and for personal Interest, I found all the phenomena and put them into one over all framework, one common system of units that are interconnected.

In Robert Forward’s dissertation, “Detection of Dynamic Gravitational Fields” he makes a point about saying that combining gravitational phenomena and electromagnetic phenomena ( to make “gravitational engineering” a practical science and new industry) it means putting it all in one set of units where all groups can share and work together. That part is what took me the most time. Including much of the 26 years of the Internet Foundation. Finding all the groups, all the outstanding detectors and generators, the models and data – to put it in a form where it can be used, not just talked about.

Now I did look at some of your other video titles. I do not know your past, nor your future. But if you are trying to understand how magnetism works, you will also need to think carefully about how the gravitational potential field and magnetism and electromagnetism and nuclear forces work. And particularly how the people involved can work together so they are not working at cross purposes, for greedy and personal reasons, or simply everyone running in endless and useless circles.

I wrote today on Twitter(X) that a “good” problem would be to replace the SpaceX first stage (“booster”) with electromagnetic acceleration field generators and controls. It is not cheap or easy, but it should be possible now. My argument was more to bootstrap the fusion groups, who are all chasing some vague global “electric power production marketplace”. But the competition is not only fierce, but somewhat cut-throat. Taking prototypes to work at global scale, 24/7 is probably not possible. I think many of the groups are crippling themselves because the try to do things “academically” or “government funding” or “commercial” and it takes skills and methods beyond what all those kinds of groups can bring to bear. But a small array of GigaWatt field generators for a few minutes to lift the Starship second stage to mission height and orbital velocity, should be possible. I say “do the numbers” and check what is possible.

Now about two decades ago I used the small network of superconducting gravimeters to put strong bounds on the speed of gravity. it is a simple lab experiment any student can do now, with an app. Those are $250,000 or more. But some of the broad band seismometers now can work. They are more like $25,000. The MEMS gravimeters (there are a few groups. Liang Cheng Tu in China and Middlemiss in Scotland and others. Those are $2500. And I can see a day when the atom interferometer chips and atomic force microscopy methods and im,improvements in quantum computer error measurements can make cell phone gravitational detectors and communication systems possible. If you search (“MEMS” “gravimeter” ) you will find more and more groups working on low cost, three axis, time of flight gravitational sensors. They can be used as gravitational compasses, and for a kind of precise gravitational GPS (precise position measurements, and gravitational image of things like the atmosphere, oceans, movements of the earth, flows inside the earth and on the sun.

The LIGO gravitational network, big and clumsy as it is, was able to detect neutron stars merging and compare the gravitational and electromagnetic signal. That event is called “GW170817” and happen in Aug 2017. The races between the two kinds of signals over 140 Million light years. So the race was 140 Million years. And the signals came in the same time. That means, for those signals from that source the speed of light and the speed of gravity are “identical”. Not close, “identical”. That cannot happen except where the electromagnetic wave process and the gravitational waves share the same underlying potential field in some fashion. Since I worked with Steve Klosko to measure (calibrate) the NASA gravitational potential models, I know what goes into them and how it is used and what it can do.

I am 75 this year and my life is running out. I worked hard all my life and have tried to write down some of what I have done or tried to do. In my first year sf high school, 60 years ago, I was only a few miles from Cape Canaveral and my Dad worked there. John Kennedy’ moon speech was made at Rice University (now a couple of miles from me) on 12 Sep 1962. I was studying every minute to help in that.

This is a long note. It is mostly my personal story, but I tried to put a few concrete things in that will give you specifics of how magnetic, electromagnetic and gravitational fields. All the frequencies that electromagnetism can measure and use are also accessible using “gravitational field methods” The big clumsy LIGO (that Robert Forward helped design and get started) needs to be made low cost, more sensitive, and aimed at things on earth, and in the solar system. I did study astrophysics when I was at the University of Maryland at College Park. That is where I met Joe Weber. I never met Robert Forward but I did get an email from him before he died. I did go through Misner Thorne and Wheeler “Gravitation” and try to correct the errors. But it is a clumsy methodology and aimed at the wrong problems. Joe Weber wanted “gravitational engineering”. I asked him and he particularly wanted gravitational communication systems. Robert Forward was interested and designed gravitational sources, which detectors now can use. But for things like gravitational imaging of the earth and oceans and atmosphere, there are better ways.

My own bias is towards “lets move things with fields”. As small as particles and neutrinos and gluons, as large as Starships carrying 150,000 metric tons of passengers and cargo and materials. It is possible, it is not that hard with computers to help.

You said “electret”, I am working on electrostatic equations now, these last few days. Storing energy in magnetic fields using electrons is hard, but the orbitals themselves can be seen as magnetic. I am a bit too tired to remember the magnetic field in the Bohr model, but I see an estimate of 12.5 Tesla. When you get close to real orbitals the magnetic fields are strong. For many things small and smart and precise is better than brute force. It is not hard just tedious.

I asked Microsoft Bing Copilot “Can you calculate the magnetic field on the axis of the first Bohr orbit in Tesla? The speed of the electron is the fine structure constant times the speed of light. The radius of the magnetic loop is the Bohr radius.” and it confirmed 12.5 Tesla.

Since I cannot remember short numbers and it was approximating, I asked it “Can you give me a few more decimals and use CoData values for all the constants, particularly the speed of light?”

It did use the 2018 Codata values, showed its work and came back with 12.566370614 Tesla on the axis of the orbit at the center of mass of the atom. You can ask for the radius for the electron and proton.  That field of the electron is going to affect the magnetic dipole moment of the proton, but I have been working for more than 12 hours today and my eyes hurt.

Richard Collins, The Internet Foundation