photoelectric experiment idea holding frequency steady and varying intensity

Wow, I just have no idea. The strains are going to be so small... Well, If you knew the strain gauage sensitivity, one could at least do a signal to noise estimate. And then you have to calibrate it somehow?

Grin, well that would be the torsional oscillator idea.. Though in this case high speed might be 0.1 - 1 Hz. The sphere inside a sphere thing has a period of ~1.5 hours, (depending on what material you choose.)*... It's the same problem as falling down a hole that goes through the center of the earth. I was picturing measuring the period change with and without the big mass.

George H.

Strain gauges are astonishingly sensitive. And we're talking about signal averaging millions of events. The Weber Bar used piezo sensors, but gravity is a lot stronger than gravity waves.

That's easy. Just rotate the dumbell 90 degrees, sit it down on a table, and measure the strain gauge output. Or squeeze the ends together with some rig.

I was thinking hundreds of Hz, at least. That would give a huge s/n advantage over a slow torsion balance.

Lead is cheap.

falling down a hole that goes through the center of the earth. I was picturing measuring the period change

Hi

To obtain high frequency while still keeping axial alignment, two or more high speed flywheels might be good, but the rotors should probably be modified to accept 4 or 5 lead slugs in the place of the holes in your picture (and then rebalanced!).

cheers, Jamie

Just came across this article showing gravity may be a "real" field and have fluid properties including turbulent flow:

If gravity is a field just like electromagnetism, then the question is where is the opposite charge (antigravity), one way to explain it maybe is a different dimension of antimatter that is connected to our matter universe, and gravity is the force created by the attraction of the matter and antimatter universes being held together, similar to the strong force of a pair of quarks except on a bigger scale, ie the universe could be a stable meta meson (a quark and antiquark bound together by the strong force). But the meta strong force is actually gravity. :D

cheers, Jamie

Those aren't holes, they're lead slugs.

Hi,

It also explains the acceleration of the universe, ie. for the strong force between quarks the force is repulsive below a certain distance and attractive beyond a certain distance. So in the meta meson model of the universe, the two meta quarks (one meta quark and one meta anti-quark) have "recently" 15billion years ago, had a transition or "big bang" in which possibly some interaction occurred, possibly switching the polarity of each node of the meson from matter to antimatter etc.. At that point of collapse, the repulsive force is at maximum and it reaches a point of bouncing the universe back outwards, and once enough expansion has occurred then the attractive force pulls the universe back inwards. This would also explain how some

There may be a certain phase transition at the collapse event when all gravity (attractive and repulsive meta strong force) cancels out at the minimum contraction and largest expansion of the universe.

This would unify all 4 forces too, since the meta strong force (gravity) is just a meta layer on top of the other 3 fundamental forces.

cheers, Jamie

I wonder why the gravity wave detector guys don't make an artificial gravity wave source, it seems like it would make sense to do that to get a reference from a earth based source without the astronomical 1/r^2 intensity falloff and also since apparently none of them have actually detected gravity waves yet. I don't know the calculations but maybe the artificial gravity waves are still to weak?

cheers, Jamie

There could be a transform added to the Schrodinger equation to convert the meta meson strong force into the observed 3 dimensional gravity force and add it into the existing Schrodinger equation. Hey why not!? :)

cheers, Jamie

But why a sphere and not just drop it beside a cylinder or a half-cylinder.

Or if you're cheap tungsten.

It could be hard to exclude near-field effects.

Sure any shape will work... a sphere is easy to solve. (mathematically.)

George H.