The Allais Effect Solved

[Mordred]

Could someone not write a program to simulate all the forces on a pendulum and see what it kicks out during a simulated eclipse and at other times?

I'm still gathering the datum on the conditions at the event Allais had measured. Mainly looking for the required angle and momentum terms required to cause the anomoly.

 

The Corriolis force was simplistic but doesn't match as close as I would like the pendulum movements before and after the eclipse. (though in right order of magnitude).

 

As its just a curiousity from my perspective I haven't spent a great deal of time on it.

 

Though I can essentially quarantee the eclipse effect on the pendulum will be through an indirect means. Simple vector mathematics tells me this as there is rotation direction change on the pendulum.

 

The dilemna I'm currently facing is finding decent information on Airy precession. I know which elements are used in one of the formulas I posted but little else.

Edited June 30, 2017 by Mordred

[Bjarne]

I'm still gathering the datum on the conditions at the event Allais had measured. Mainly looking for the required angle and momentum terms required to cause the anomoly.

 

Most people think Dark Flow is caused by the pull of a nearby universe. I belive it is the pull from the barycenter of our own universe.

 

You've presented an equation or a graph of the predicted pendulum frequency as a function of time?

 

 

Pendulum measurement is much more limit, because of much lower elevation of measurement is possible.

 

The 4 factors responsible for the Duration & Magnitude of the anomaly

1.) The moon elevation higher as the measurement device, weakens the anomaly. (8-9 μGal per 1000 km)

2.) The lower the moon is, the less DFA will be exposed. (8-9 μGal per 1000 km)

3.) Pendulum measuremnet have several more limitaion factors, and is really a bad device to use.

4.) The "rotation" of the 2D force component triangle (discussed above) - due to the change of the orbit related angle between the Moon and Earth

 

We don't know the maximum possible DFA, the gravimter experiment can measure maximum 50 to 55μGal (pendulums can only meassure about 35μGal)

To my opinion the magnitude is about 40μGal , - could be little more or less. Only the new Measurement method can reveal it.

 

Let’s say the Moon is frozen at its position, only earth is moving, and therefore the force component 2D triangle (as a whole) is rotating

The blue and red spot shows where the resulting vertical force points to

 

 

Excel here

Edited July 1, 2017 by Bjarne

[Mordred]

Most people think it is caused by the pull of a nearby universe.

No I can quarantee after 30 years studying Cosmology most people do not agree. I have an extremely high degree of certainty as I studied throughout those 30 years.

 

(Including Dark Flow in cosmology applications)

 

I never restricted myself to strictly textbook but examined any properly defined model upon its own merits.

Keep in mind that last bit refers to mathematically defined.

 

Anyways all that personal blah blah aside.

 

Even you must admit examining the types of possible vectors that can potentially affect a pendulum to a dataset is a logical approach. Aka examine the pendulum itself to see if your DFA can possibly supply the correct vectors

 

(magnitude +direction) Very important. (include the applicable conservation laws)

 

The cosmology application of dark flow as per how the model describes dark flow (under Cosmological applications would have no affect on a pendulum. This is a well researched topic.

 

One of the consequences of well researched topics is upper and lower bounds of possible range values etc.

 

However as this is your model under development. DFA can be whatever you describe. At some point you will need to learn how to model a physical system (dark flow included) in order to ever be accepted as potentially valid under physics.

 

By the way if dark flow was strong enough to affect a pendulum on Earth. Also as it does not involve lunar cycles on Earth under cosmology. Rather it is of non zero value throughout our universe history.

 

A Flow over time on Cosmological scales that has sufficient energy/momentum to affect the mass of that pendulum

 

Our solar system would not have formed. I could step you through Jeans instability which gives rate of infall vs other dynamics. However without a strong background knowledge it would be futile.

 

(So why don't we leave a cosmological dark flow out of our localized Earth, Sun moon system).

 

The math you do not have

 

Primarily range of possible vectors that can match the experiment is examined by your model You cannot have any guess work.

Everything must be defined mathematically if that dynamic is involved or potentially involved in a top notch model.

 

Start working on your vectors to the pendulum. That is my professional advice.. take it or ignore it. Though ignoring it means you never push the research of dark flow studies. Plain facts of life. No one will ever advance physics without the required applicable math. Plain and simple

Edited July 1, 2017 by Mordred

[Bjarne]

During the summer 2017, an article [1] as well as an Erratum  [2] was published in the International Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics , claiming that the Allais Effect was Solved and that the cause of this mystery was due to Dark Flow Acceleration (hereafter DFA). 

The same was discussed at this forum ....

The claims were:

• The relative gravimeter would measure only ADG of the Earth.
• The absolute gravimeter would measure ADG of the Earth and DFA
• The anomaly was predicted to increase until maximum eclipse and then decrease again.
• The lunar eclipse on 7 August 18.20 UTC was predicted to be the best possible event to test the above-mentioned claim in 2017 and several years to come

Several universities (on the northern hemisphere) was encouraged to measure ADG on 7 August as recommended in the two above-mentioned articles.
Unfortunately, only DTU (Denmark) promised to see what they could do as they had a gravity measurement project going on in Greenland anyway (measuring how fast the inland ice is melting). 
At the time of contacting DTU, the measurement teams had already scheduled the 2017 summer measurement missions to Greenland as well as the time to arrive at and leave various measurement places.   

Early in the morning on 7 August (the day of the Lunar Eclipse), the team had scheduled to fly (by helicopter) from an inland measurement station and to Scoresbysund airport and then to continue measuring ADG near that airport - 12 hours before and after the lunar eclipse - starting in the morning of 7 August and until morning on the following day, 8 August.

However, bad weather delayed the flight to the airport, and the gravity measurement (the day of the eclipse) was not started until 21.50 UTC. This was 3.5 hours after the culmination of the lunar eclipse.

Fig.1  Absolute and relative gravity measurement near Scoresbysund airport
Starting 7 August at 21.50 UTC and ended 8 August at 09.08

Fig. 1 shows that from the start of the measurement (at 21.50 UTC) and all night during which the measurement went on, the absolute (blue) curve was gradually decreasing (“depressed”) relative to the (red) relative measurement curve.  This result was exactly as the theory had predicted earlier that summer. 

The data used for figure-1 is completely unfiltered for tidal and other influences.
The temperature variation (during that day and night) was recorded to 8 °C. - [3]
The night temperature variation therefore must have been much less than 8 °C. 
Such insignificant temperature variation is far from enough to explain the cause of such a significant anomaly that was measured that day. 

There is no doubt that the two gravimeters reveal a remarkable mysterious anomaly between 40 and 50 µGal. 
The cause of this anomaly is, of course, unknown.

To speculate, one can suspect a few different causes, for example that something was wrong with one of the gravimeters etc.   However, even though this measurement so far must be considered an unsolved mystery, there is no doubt that the above mentioned theory [1] and [2] predicted exactly such a strange behavior / anomaly a few months earlier that summer.

It is, of course, regrettable that the DTU team could not manage to start measurement 12 hours before the maximum lunar eclipse as this was (and still is) required to test the full range of the predicted anomaly [1] and [2]

If such a full set of data would have been available today, we would had seen that the (blue) absolute gravity meas-urement curve;

1. would have increased gradually about 50 µGal twelve hours before the lunar eclipse
2. would peak exactly by the maximum lunar eclipse,
3. then, after the lunar eclipse, would gradually decrease (relative to the relative measurement) - as we have now seen by figure-1.

This would, of course, (in addition to what has now been revealed) have shown a perfect cause effect coherence, underlining that the position of the Moon (from time to time) is, in a very predictable way, responsible for exposing Dark Flow Acceleration in a way so that DFA can be measured by much more effective and precise methods / devices than pendulum measurement.

Anyway, the measurement taken 7 on August 2017 should be a big hint showing that a significant aspect of science could very well have been almost entirely overlooked. Time must now have come for the scientific society to take the Allais effect much more seriously.

The next options to measure exposed DFA are 

12 hours measurement before and after one of these eclipses is a minimum. 
To get an even better overview, it is recommended to measure 36 hours before and after one or several of the eclipses mentioned above. In these cases, it is possible to compare measurement data taken the day before and the day after the eclipse (that will show no anomalous behavior) in contrast to the day of the eclipse when anomalies must be ex-pected. 

Also note the duration of eclipse anomalies are sometimes shorter or longer than 12 hours before and after the eclipse culmination. This can easy be calculated.

 

REFERENCES

1.Bjarne Lorenzen (2017), The Cause of the Allais Effect Solved https://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=76756
2.Bjarne Lorenzen (2017), The Erratum to “The Cause of the Allais Effect Solved” http://file.scirp.org/Html/3-4500675_77930.htm
3.Temperature recorded Scoresbysund 7 of August 2017 https://www.wunderground.com/history/station/04341/2017/8/6/DailyHistory.html?req_city=&req_state=&req_statename=&reqdb.zip=&reqdb.magic=&reqdb.wmo=
 

Note.
Please read reference. 1 and 2. 
If any question can be answered by these references, I will only refer to these. 
There are no reason to repeat what already has been answered here at this forum, or by the references.

Edited October 17, 2017 by Bjarne

[Silvestru]

2 hours ago, Bjarne said:

During the summer 2017, an article [1] as well as an Erratum  [2] was published in the International Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics , claiming that the Allais Effect was Solved and that the cause of this mystery was due to Dark Flow Acceleration (hereafter DFA). 

 

2 hours ago, Bjarne said:

REFERENCES

1.Bjarne Lorenzen (2017), The Cause of the Allais Effect Solved

These are your claims published. Are you trying to back up your claims in the last The Allais Effect Solved thread with papers that you published as proof?

[Bjarne]

I am trying to direct the public's attention to the fact that now it is also very likely that hard core evidence, justifies that continued measurements should have the highest possible priority.

Edited October 17, 2017 by Bjarne