The Allais Effect Solved

[Bjarne]

This article have just passed Peer Review ... http://www.scirp.org/Journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=76756

 

Notice the prediction in the paper..

The solar eclipse in USA, - August this year, - is just excellent to confirm this very significant and important new aspect of science..

 

ABSTRACT

An Anisotropic Dark Flow Acceleration can solve the cause of the Allais Effect. This claim is based on a kinematic analysis of 21 Allais Effect measurements. All measurements (without exception) substantiate that the Allais Effect is consistent with anisotropic acceleration and that the acceleration is directed in the same direction as Dark Flow. So far, Allais Effect measurements have taken place blindfolded. Now, it is possible to calculate and predict when and where the Allais Effect can be confirmed, and of course also predict where and why no effect can be confirmed. In addition, it is now also possible to calculate how strong anomalies can be expected, and even whether the effect can be measured before or after the eclipse reaches the maximum. Still different pendulums are the most effective instrument to use. The reason why such strange devices are the best option is also no longer a mystery. This new theory also uncovers why advanced instruments can’t be used successfully, which also explains why such significant acceleration could have been hidden for such a long time. The exact magnitude of the anisotropic acceleration is calculated to be around 35μGal (3,5e-7m/s²), and not much deviation must be expected in the years to come.

An Anisotropic Acceleration can now be mathematically proven

In order for a significant anisotropic acceleration to be measurable on Earth (e.g. with a gravimeter or various pendulums), specific conditions must be present.

It is somewhat similar to the situation that it is also impossible to measure the acceleration of Earth’s orbit acceleration from Earth (given that everything on Earth is part of the same acceleration frame of reference).

However, there is an indirect method of measuring Dark Flow Acceleration (in short DFA), which is the same force / acceleration responsible for the Allais Effect.

The Following are required.

• The Earth must accelerate slightly opposite to DFAD, (towards north) and the cause of the acceleration must be due to the force of gravity of the Moon.
• A testing body on Earth (able to interact/measure DFA) must be (more or less) unaffected by the force accelerating Earth’s opposing DFA.
• The rotation of the Earth must bring a measurement device to the best possible position whereby the testing-body (of the measurement device) (more or less) can interact with the exposed DFA.
• The pendulum must swing east-west , - not north-south.
• A relatively fast and sudden change of the DFA exposure must be present for gravity measurement results to be significant / convincing. (Pendulums are more sensitive, and therefore a better device to use)

These requirements allow a testing body to be exposed to DFA, whereby anomalies can be measured.

The crankshaft responsible for these phenomena is the motion of the Moon. Sometimes the Moon is situated above the Earth, sometimes below.

Due to mass attraction between Earth and the moon, Earth is sometimes periodically accelerated slightly upwards or downwards on what is here called a Dark Flow Acceleration Axis. (Fig. 2)

Solar Eclipse (as well as Lunar Eclipses) are perfect occasions, - where the slightly upwards or downwards acceleration of the Earth undergoes remarkable changings. This is why eclipses are perfect occasions where the exposure of DFA can happen for short time periods.

The illustration (above) shows a solar eclipse where the moon is located 2000 km higher relative to a parallel, linear line, ‘X’, between the Sun and Earth. This corresponds to approx. 0,3°. In that way, the Moon’s acceleration due to gravity pulls the Earth in the northern direction with an acceleration which can be calculated by GM/r² (7,35*10²²*6,67e-*10^-11/380000000² ) divided by 90° = 0.00000037m/s² (or 37 μGal, per 1°) (the result is therefore 12 μGal)

• Testing body A (see illustration) will therefore not be directly affected by the upwards pull from the Moon, but only indirectly effected by the Earth’s upward acceleration, - and is thus exposed to influence by DFA, so long as this body is not connected with earth.
• On the other hand, testing body B (near the Equator) will almost be in the same frame of reference as the accelerating globe and will therefore be exposed to DFA to far less degree. (because testing body B is also pulled upwards by the Moon)
• Testing body D (and others located south of B) is not exposed to DFA influence at all, as these testing-bodies are all accelerating upwards, pulled by the Moon.
• Testing body C is fully affected by the upwards acceleration of the Earth (in the same acceleration reference frame) and is therefore not exposed to DFA.
• Testing bodies located between A and up towards C will gradually be more affected by the Earth’s upwards acceleration and will therefore also be poor testing areas for detecting pendulum anomalies.

Read more.... http://www.scirp.org/Journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=76756

[swansont]

This article have just passed Peer Review ... http://www.scirp.org/Journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=76756

 

 

 

 

Not exactly what is meant by peer review when the model is "publish everything so we make money"

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_Research_Publishing

 

That's not a configuration for an eclipse.

[Bjarne]

 

 

 

Not exactly what is meant by peer review when the model is "publish everything so we make money"

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_Research_Publishing

 

That's not a configuration for an eclipse.

Total solar eclipse is not necessary, and the point here is only that the testing device and the Earth must be in different acceleration reference frames, which also depend on the position of the testing body and the rotation of the Earth, relative to the position of the moon.

 

This is very good illustrated by the 1995 eclipse. The moon pulls the earth upwards that day..

In the early morning of 24 October 1995, a gravity measurement was taken for oil exploration purposes in northern India when by chance the Allais Effect was measured (12μGal).

What we see here is that in the morning, northern India is brought just above the Sub-Solar point (and at the same "level" as the moon) whereby a testing body (in Northern India) thereby immediately was exposed to DFA, simply because the moon did no longer accelerate the testing body upwards, but only the earth.

Also notice that the DFA interaction axis was parallel to the DFA axis (see the red arrow).. Both of these factors are perfect for measuring a gravitational anomaly connected to the Allais Effect. (Fig. 21 & 22).

Edited June 12, 2017 by Bjarne

[swansont]

The illustration (above) shows a solar eclipse where the moon is located 2000 km higher relative to a parallel, linear line, ‘X’, between the Sun and Earth. This corresponds to approx. 0,3°. In that way, the Moon’s acceleration due to gravity pulls the Earth in the northern direction with an acceleration which can be calculated by GM/r² (7,35*10²²*6,67e-*10^-11/380000000² ) divided by 90° = 0.00000037m/s² (or 37 μGal, per 1°) (the result is therefore 12 μGal)

 

 

 

You're going to have to explain this calculation. It looks like you literally divided by 90.

 

Why wouldn't you just multiply by sin(0.3º), which is 0.005, rather than 0.003 = 0.3*(1/90)?

Total solar eclipse is not necessary, and the point here is only that the testing device and the Earth must be in different acceleration reference frames, which also depend on the position of the testing body and the rotation of the Earth, relative to the position of the moon.

 

This is very good illustrated by the 1995 eclipse. The moon pulls the earth upwards that day..

In the early morning of 24 October 1995, a gravity measurement was taken for oil exploration purposes in northern India when by chance the Allais Effect was measured (12μGal).

What we see here is that in the morning, northern India is brought just above the Sub-Solar point (and at the same "level" as the moon) whereby a testing body (in Northern India) thereby immediately was exposed to DFA, simply because the moon did no longer accelerated the testing body upwards, but only the earth.

Also notice that the DFA interaction axis was parallel to the DFA axis (see the red arrow).. Both of these factors are perfect for measuring a gravitational anomaly connected to the Allais Effect. (Fig. 21 & 22).

 

What is meant by the sub-solar point? Why is India exposed to the "DFA", and why is the instrument somehow not being accelerated the same way?

[Bjarne]

 

 

You're going to have to explain this calculation. It looks like you literally divided by 90.

 

Why wouldn't you just multiply by sin(0.3º), which is 0.005, rather than 0.003 = 0.3*(1/90)?

 

It is very possible that this (and more) can be a little more precise.

To know the very precise upwards acceleration of the earth and therefore also the DFA exposure is not essential right now, (at least not to me) but well better suggestions are off course welcome..

To me it is important to understand what is up and down in this phenomena, and that many Allais Effect measurements are taken especial this year in the United States

Edited June 12, 2017 by Bjarne

[swansont]

 

 

It is very possible that this (and more) can be a little more precise.

To know the very precise upwards acceleration of the eareth and therefore also the DFA exposure is not essential right now, (at least not to me) but well better suggestions are off course welcome..

 

 

It is essential if you want to do actual science. Dividing by an angle in degrees is almost never correct in a geometric application like this.

 

This has historically been reported as an eclipse-only phenomenon. If an eclipse isn't necessary, where are all the other measurements? You should get a larger acceleration when the moon is at the extreme end of its inclination.

[Bjarne]

 

 

You're going to have to explain this calculation. It looks like you literally divided by 90.

 

Why wouldn't you just multiply by sin(0.3º), which is 0.005, rather than 0.003 = 0.3*(1/90)?

 

What is meant by the sub-solar point? Why is India exposed to the "DFA", and why is the instrument somehow not being accelerated the same way?

If the moon is 90 degree above the line X, see fig. 3, it would pull the earth upwards with full force 7,35*10²²*6,67e-*10^-11/380000000²

If the moon is 45 degree above the line X, see fig. 3, it would pull the earth upwards with ½ force

If the moon is 1 degree above the line X, see fig. 3, it will pull the earth upwards with 1/90 of its force ..

Edited June 12, 2017 by Bjarne

[Strange]

If the moon was at a 90 degree above the line X, see fig. 3, it would pull the earth upwards with full force 7,35*10²²*6,67e-*10^-11/380000000²

If the moon was at a 45 degree above the line X, see fig. 3, it would pull the earth upwards with ½ force

If the moon was at a 1 degree above the line X, see fig. 3, it will pull the earth upwards with 1/90 of its force upwards..

 

 

This seems contrary to the usual way forces work. Can you explain why?

[Bjarne]

 

 

It is essential if you want to do actual science. Dividing by an angle in degrees is almost never correct in a geometric application like this.

 

This has historically been reported as an eclipse-only phenomenon. If an eclipse isn't necessary, where are all the other measurements? You should get a larger acceleration when the moon is at the extreme end of its inclination.

Allais Marius did also measure the effect when there was no eclipse at all. Both these option are actually possible. Which explain that the effect illustrated by fig 3 is possible, also even though this not illustrate a eclipse.

This does not mean that 2 difference acceleration frames not is possible by total solar eclipse, off course this is possible, as I wrote it only depend on where is the testing body relative to the moon. There are many possibilities, and even lunar eclipses are sometimes reported to have a similar effect.

Also, remember that many times Allais Effects not was confirmed “not right under the moon”, but actually before or after the total eclipse, and therefore often long distance away from the shadow of the moon, which sometimes excactly is what is required for the testing body to be exposed to DFA.

You should get a larger acceleration when the moon is at the extreme end of its inclination.

 

If the upwards acceleration of the test body is stronger than the exposed DFA, the upwards acceleration will dominate, - whereby DFA not is exposed even through the earth is pulled upwards

Why is India exposed to the "DFA", and why is the instrument somehow not being accelerated the same way?

 

A test body is exposed to the DFA so soon the moon pulls the earth upwards but not the test body

Edited June 12, 2017 by Bjarne

[swansont]

If the moon is 90 degree above the line X, see fig. 3, it would pull the earth upwards with full force 7,35*10²²*6,67e-*10^-11/380000000²

If the moon is 45 degree above the line X, see fig. 3, it would pull the earth upwards with ½ force

If the moon is 1 degree above the line X, see fig. 3, it will pull the earth upwards with 1/90 of its force ..

 

 

That's not how geometry works. You need to justify why you aren't using vector components here. i.e. if I exerted a force at a 45º angle, the horizontal and vertical components would each be 0.707 of the net force.

 

If the upwards acceleration of the test body is stronger than the DFA, the upwards acceleration will dominate, and the result is that DFA not be exposed.

A test body is exposed to the DFA so soon the moon pulls the earth upwards but not the test body

 

 

You need to explain this in much greater detail. How does the moon exert a force on the earth but not the test body?

[Bjarne]

 

 

That's not how geometry works. You need to justify why you aren't using vector components here. i.e. if I exerted a force at a 45º angle, the horizontal and vertical components would each be 0.707 of the net force.

This sound unbelievable.

 

I am not university educated, if you are sure that the acceleration I mention is very much off just show it and let’s see which difference that make

 

[swansont]

Allais Marius did also measure the effect when there was no eclipse at all. Both these option are actually possible. Which explain that the effect illustrated by fig 3 is possible, also even though this not illustrate a eclipse.

This does not mean that 2 difference acceleration frames not is possible by total solar eclipse, off course this is possible, as I wrote it only depend on where is the testing body relative to the moon. There are many possibilities, and even lunar eclipses are sometimes reported to have a similar effect.

Also, remember that many times Allais Effects not was confirmed “not right under the moon”, but actually before or after the total eclipse, and therefore often long distance away from the shadow of the moon, which sometimes excactly is what is required for the testing body to be exposed to DFA.

 

It sounds like one should be able to measure this quite easily. But for the ones measure around an eclipse, it's referred to as an anomaly — it's only present at that time.. Why does it turn on and off? The moon has basically the same relative location for a lot longer duration than this.

[Bjarne]

 

It sounds like one should be able to measure this quite easily. But for the ones measure around an eclipse, it's referred to as an anomaly — it's only present at that time.. Why does it turn on and off? The moon has basically the same relative location for a lot longer duration than this.

 

Very good question

It turn of so soon the moon pull too much upwards (north) in the test body, this happens so soon the moon is too high on the horizon, - and it turn off all the time the moon is too low and cannot accelerate the earth upwards. As I wrote if too much upwards acceleration (upwards pull) of the test body will dominate it will "cancel out" the exposed downwards DFA

Edited June 12, 2017 by Bjarne

[swansont]

 

This sound unbelievable.

 

I am not university educated, if you are sure that the acceleration I mention is very much off just show it and let’s see which difference that make

 

 

This is basic geometry. If you can't get this right, none of your calculations have any credibility. There is no way this would have passed proper peer review of a respected journal.

 

Very good question

It turn of because the moon pull to much in the test body when it is too high on the horizon, and it turn off all the time the moon is too low and cannot accelerate the earth upwards.

 

But aren't you claiming it pulls on the earth and the test body differently?

[Bjarne]

 

But aren't you claiming it pulls on the earth and the test body differently?

Everything follows the (downwards) Dark Flow Motion and as Dark Flow Acceleration.

Normally this motion and acceleration is therefore "invincible".

You can only discovered it, if you are able to measure relative to a reference frame at (more or less) rest, - and exactly this is where the moon comes in.

The Moon can bring the Earth to a frame of more or less dark flow “acceleration rest”

If this “acceleration rest” not also effect a testing body (on earth) , the testing body is free to do what it (almost) always does, - simply just follow the Dark Flow Acceleration.

 

So this is all what this is about, - bringing the Earth to an acceleration rest frame , - and not the testing body.

This summer will be one of the best possible opportunities to measure exactly this is USA: the scientific community should really take this serious; it could be an important step forwards.

Edited June 12, 2017 by Bjarne

[swansont]

 

So this is all what this is about, - bringing the Earth to an acceleration rest frame , - and not the testing body.

 

 

But why is the test body not subject to these forces too?

[Bjarne]

 

 

But why is the test body not subject to these forces too?

The point is that the test body (in this "experiment") must be subject to DFA, it is the test body that is pulled downwards by DFA, - but the Earth not, - the Earth is for a short period at time at Dark Flow "acceleration rest" - thanks to the upwards pull of the moon.

This is really the only way DFA can be measured, by us here on the planet.

Edited June 12, 2017 by Bjarne

[swansont]

The point is that the test body (in this "experiment") must be subject to DFA, it is the test body that is pulled downwards by DFA, - but the Earth not, - the Earth is for a short period at time at Dark Flow "acceleration rest" - thanks to the upwards pull of the moon.

This is really the only way DFA can be measured, by us here on the planet.

 

 

Under what conditions does this happen? What is this alleged dark flow?

[Strange]

 

This sound unbelievable.

 

I am not university educated, if you are sure that the acceleration I mention is very much off just show it and let’s see which difference that make

 

 

This is not university-level stuff. This is basic schoolboy physics.

 

http://www.mathcentre.ac.uk/resources/uploaded/mc-web-mech1-5-2009.pdf

http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/vectors

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/higher/physics/mech_matt/vectors/revision/1/

Edited June 12, 2017 by Strange

[Bjarne]

 

 

Under what conditions does this happen? What is this alleged dark flow?

Most of the time the Moon pulls the Earth up or down, but different object (and the Earth) are all the time affected different all depending where on Earth these are, and how low or high the moon is... etc...

If the pull of the Moon affecting a a test body and the Earth , as already discussed above, and if (what I call) the DFA interaction also is more or less perfect, - the Allais effect can be measured at the correct position..

A NASA team was discovered Dark Flow. Many also believe that the WMAP contains data that can be interpreted as evidence for Dark Flow.

Furthermore many believe it is a another Universe pulling in ours.

I think the acceleration is pointing to the center of our own universe.

To finally prove DFA, - "beyond any doubt" - required a lot more measurements, the good news is , that now there is for the first time a theory that I am sure holds water. Now scientist can remove their blindfolds and therefore also encorage far more to participate. This it self is a step forwards for that aspect of science that really deserve must more attention.

For those that begins to understand all this, they will know how perfect the solar eclipse in USA in August really is. It can take a long long time, before such perfect opportunity again is possible

Measurement should not only be taken right under the moon, but many different places, - to be able to encircle what we are up against.

Don't miss the starting gun.

 

This is not university-level stuff. This is basic schoolboy physics.

 

http://www.mathcentre.ac.uk/resources/uploaded/mc-web-mech1-5-2009.pdf

http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/vectors

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/higher/physics/mech_matt/vectors/revision/1/

Thanks

Edited June 12, 2017 by Bjarne

[swansont]

 

Most of the time the Moon pulls the Earth up or down, but different object (and the Earth) are all the time affected different all depending where on Earth these are, and how low or high the moon is... etc...

If the pull of the Moon affecting a a test body and the Earth , as already discussed above, and if (what I call) the DFA interaction also is more or less perfect, - the Allais effect can be measured at the correct position..

 

 

You have not explained at all why this effect should be present only intermittently. The moon is always there. It is always acting on everything on earth at all times. The passage of the moon during an eclipse has essentially no variation in the amount of pull "up" or "down", and the angle of inclination varies over the course of ~two weeks from crossing the ecliptic to maximum deviation and back (and repeat on the other side)

 

We can see variations in pendulum periods due to the moon, because of the net acceleration at the pendulum is reduced when the moon is overhead. There is nothing anomalous about this. Fairly straightforward conceptually, though the calculations are a little involved. (Loomis measured this in ~1930, comparing pendulum clocks to quartz clocks). But the Allais effect has something "turning off" (or on) for a much shorter duration, and you haven't explained why this should be, or be expected.

[Bjarne]

 

 

You have not explained at all why this effect should be present only intermittently. The moon is always there. It is always acting on everything on earth at all times. The passage of the moon during an eclipse has essentially no variation in the amount of pull "up" or "down", and the angle of inclination varies over the course of ~two weeks from crossing the ecliptic to maximum deviation and back (and repeat on the other side)

 

We can see variations in pendulum periods due to the moon, because of the net acceleration at the pendulum is reduced when the moon is overhead. There is nothing anomalous about this. Fairly straightforward conceptually, though the calculations are a little involved. (Loomis measured this in ~1930, comparing pendulum clocks to quartz clocks). But the Allais effect has something "turning off" (or on) for a much shorter duration, and you haven't explained why this should be, or be expected.

 

 

First, at all, yes the moon really active interacte with a pendulum.

I have also mentioned this allready in the articl, - few times “confirmed Allais effect” is in fact mistakes, - in reality the moon interacted with the pendulum, - without Allais researches have been pay attention to that was the case..

This influence is real no doubt about it. However, the (real) Allis Effect is about the experience that sometime a similar effect also happens without the moon have played an active role. For example when the force acting on the pendulums comes from the opposite direction of where the moon is.

 

Yes the moon is always there, but it is inclined relative to the Earth

 

One of the most important requirements is to bring the Earth to "Dark Flow Acceleration Rest" - This is necessary to be able to meassure a test object affected by DFA..

 

So far we have discussed

The fact that that the moon can sometimes pull/ accelerate the earth upwards, while a testing bodies on earth not will fell the upwards acceleration and therefore is free to interact with DFA.

We have also discussed that testing object A is a better option as object B. (Later I will explain the opposite is possible when using an absolute gravimeter)

 

The acceleration due to gravity of the moon affecting the earth and everything on it is about 100 times stronger as DFA, Only about 1% of the force of the moon, is enough to expose the full meassurement potential of DFA.

 

Why is object A only sometimes exposed for DFA interaction ?

The answers are...

P1. When the Moon is at position P1, (The image is exaggerated), - both the earth and the testing body is accelerating upwards 5 times faster as the capacity of DFA. The Exposed DFA is therefore canceled out. (The moon and the testing body are more or less in the same reference frame of acceleration).

P2 When the moon is at position P2, - it will accelerate the Earth upwards, but not testing body A, this is when Allais effect can be meassured, given that time and location is OK

P3 and P4 - Now both the testing body and the Earth is pulled downwards, and DFA is simply not exposed for any testing body on Earth. ( All Allais research under these circumstances have come out with nothing..)

 

It is important to notice

• that the moons position at P2 excert enough upwards accleration of the Earth to expose the full potential of DFA,
• that , the stronger the moon pull the testing body upwards, the weaker measurement result must be expected...
• that, if the testing body is pulled upwards with a an acceleration faster as the DFA, no anomaly at all can be measured.

Edited June 13, 2017 by Bjarne

[swansont]

 

So far we have discussed

The fact that that the moon can sometimes pull/ accelerate the earth upwards, while a testing bodies on earth not will fell the upwards acceleration and therefore is free to interact with DFA.

 

 

 

No. This is a claim made by you, and one which you have neither explained nor justified. You do not get to pass this off as established fact.

 

Why does the moon not interact with the testing body? If you can't explain this, and support it as a testable bit of science, there's nothing further to discuss.

[Bjarne]

 

 

 

Why does the moon not interact with the testing body?

 

 

The moon will "interact" (pull) the testing body.

However the moon will not pull the testing body upwards, for a short period , because the moon and the testing body are both at the same level / altitude - on the Dark Flow axis as illustrated by the image below.

 

This happen while the earth is pulled upwards by the moon.

Thus, the test object is exposed to DFA, and the Earth not

To make it very simple, - the moon prevent the Earth to follow the dark flow acceleration, - but cannot prevent the testing body doing so

 

Edited June 13, 2017 by Bjarne

[swansont]

 

 

The moon will "interact" (pull) the testing body.

However the moon will not pull the testing body upwards, for a short period

 

 

How short? Why for a short period?