Engineering View of Lazar's Anti-Gravity Physics
Engineering View
of Lazar's
Anti-Gravity Physics
George D. Hathaway, P.Eng.
Hathaway Consulting Services
39 Kendal Ave., Toronto
Ontario, Canada M5R 1L5
Introduction
This author was
asked by Larry Fenwick, editor of the CUFORN Bulletin, to review a recent video
describing Robert Lazar's theories and purported observation. In this video,
Lazar repeats previous claims that he witnessed tests of advanced "flying
saucers" of extraterrestial origin and took part in briefings describing
their operation and mode of propulsion in a secret government facility in
Nevada.
This paper will
analyse some of the so-called "anti-gravitational physics" from a
conventional engineering and physics perspective. As in most of these cases,
the propounder of the theory tries to give it an air of respectability by
invoking well-know and conventional ideas in the physical and engineering
sciences as justification for the more speculative ideas. This is acceptable if
the conclusions and inferences drawn follow a well-defined and rigorous
development. If the development of the ideas is not rigorous, then there is no
need to invoke conventional wisdom a priori. It is into this latter category
that the anti-gravity theory of Lazar falls (hard).
For the clairity,
this brief examination will be divided into three sections: Borrowing from
Conventional Physics, Problems with Lazar's Physics, and Engineering Problems.
The first section will highlight the background ideas from mainstream physics,
primarily General Relativity theory, on which Lazar tries to build his case.
The second section identifies problems with "Lazar Physics" and
points out where pure speculation takes over
from conventional knowledge. The third section considers problems with
trying to engineer the physical systems Lazar describes.
It is hoped that
the level of understanding required to follow these arquments is the same as
required to try to follow Lazar's thesis.
Borrowing From
Conventional Physics
According to
General Relativity, the three-dimensional space we generally perceive can be
coupled to a time dimension and called "Space-Time". This concept can
now be given physical properties including viewing it as a 4-dimensional
"fabric" which can be bent,
or warped.
Space-time can also be perceived as enveloping all masses in the univers, as
raisins in a plum pudding. These masses, stars, planets, atomic particles, all
have the property of causing the space-time fabric to bend, the amount of bend
being a function of the mass involved. Since the measurement of distance is a
function of the physical dimensions of the spatial portion of the fabric,
bending the fabric will cause distance measurements to change. In fact, bending
the fabric enough in the vicinity of our sun will cause the real distance to
the nearby stars to increase.
Lazar seems to
suggest that large masses (eg black holes ) are the only way to bend the fabric
of space-time (apart from his gravity waves ). Two other methods are allowed by
the theory, namely high charge density and spin, but he avoids mentioning
these.
This bending
would also cause light rays to follow curved paths around the object or
spacecraft doing the bending, thus possibly rendering a craft invisible to
outside observaters, as Lazar explains.
The strong force
which binds positively charged protons together in the nucleus of a atom is
well known, although its cause and precise mechanism are not.
Lazar's
descriptipn of transmutation of elements to more or less stable elements by
bombarding these elements with protons is substantially correct. It is known
that by doing so, new elements can and have been produced, up to atomic number
( # of protons ) Z=110. However, most only last ( are stable for ) fractions of
a second. It is speculated by mainstream physicists that if atoms could be
manufactured with Z=115, they might be stable enough to last days or years
before decaying into lighter elements by radioactivity. This is pure
speculation, however.
It is also know
that in certain high-energy atomic interactions with bombarding particles, a
mirror-image of normal matter can be produced in tiny amounts, called
anti-matter. Upon colliding with atomic
particles of normal matter, both particles annihilate each other with a
tremendous release of engery, as Lazar points out.
These are the
main points from conventional physics that Lazar uses to give the impression
that what is to follow is not only reasonable but realizable.
Problems with
Lazar's Physics
It is hard to
conceive of the method whereby Lazar proposes to decrease the distance from our
solar system to the nearby stars by bending space-time in the manner described.
The simulation involving the fishing net model of space-time Lazar uses to
demonstrate decreasing distance is at odds with General Relativity's
description of actions near large gravitational fields.
So far there has
been no hint that either anti-matter or gravitational waves will emanate from
element Z=115 when bombarded by protons. If this was the case, one might expect
to have seen some tendency to do this in the higher Z elements, such as those
above Z=100. Why will this suddenly occur at Z=115 and nowhere else?
Most physicists
agree that gravity, like other fields such as electromagnetism, displays
complementary aspects of a particle-like and a wave-like nature depending upon
the particular situation. Lazar's statement that gravity is only a wave with no
particulate aspect is not supported by any evidence as far as conventional
physics is concerned. Lazar also fails to mention those physicists who consider
gravity to be neither waves or particles but merely special arrangements of
electromagnetic fields or manifestations of a much more subtle energy form.
Lazar makes the
correspondence between the strong nuclear force and what he calls "Gravity
A". There is no strong evidence for this correspondence. Even if the
strong nuclear force could be stimulated to reach outside the boundary of an
atom as claimed by Lazar, there is no indication that it would act like normal
gravity ("Gravity B" ) and or bend the fabric of space-time. Just
because a force is attractive doesn't mean it is gravity. The only slight hint
that there are differnet "forms" of gravity is in the discovery of
the so-called "5th force", a slight repulsive force much smaller than
normal gravity.
Lazar never
clarifies how the same element Z=115 when bombared with protons can
simultaneously release anti-matter and gravitational waves. Presumably, the proton engery must be
astronomical to preform just one of these feats. There is a terrible energy
imbalance between available proton energy and that energy required to bend
space-time, if General Relativity is to be believed.
If, as Lazar
claims, element Z=115 is only found on certain stars whose density and mass are
of a certain critical size, why has it not shown up on spectroscopic images of
stars, of which we on earth have catalogued many thousands?
Lazar gives no
indication of why it follows that mechanically directing these hypothetical
gravity waves in a certain spatial orientation will therefore bend the
space-time fabric in the required direction and thus foreshorten the distance
in that direction and thus foreshorten the distance in that direction. There is
no evidence from General Relativity that such bending can be made
anisotropically (ie in a preferred direction ).
Engineering
Problems
Lazar claims that
since gravity waves are produced by Z=115 ("Gravity A") they can be
amplified and directed. Becasue cosmological gravity is a function of masses
such as stars and planets, the wave-like nature of gravity can have an almost
infinite set of frequencies ascribed to it. This is due to the near-infinite
variety of speeds and directions of all the masses in the universe relative to
one another. for effective "anti-gravity" propulsion of the type
described by Lazar, the bandwidth (capacity to amplify many frequencies) of
such gravity wave amplifiers would have to be so large that we could not hope
to engineer any such amplification scheme.
An amplifier must
be able to distinguish what is being amplified from the power required to
amplify whatever is being amplified. since gravity penetrates all matter, the
amplifiers must be construced from non-matter, an unlikely situation. The
directing of such waves from an amplifier via some antenna or gravity radiator
is even more unlikely.
Even if such
amplifiers and ratiators were realizable, why use element Z=115 as the source?
Why not design a super-high frequency oscillator to replace the hard-to-get element
115 (since it is only available on or near stars)?
If the scale of
the anti-gravity, anti-matter "reactor" shown in the video is any
indication, the likelyhood of directing a super highly-energetic beam of
protons up and around such a tightly-curved tube without a super magnetic or
electrostatic field is negligible. This is assuming there is room in the lower
deck of the craft to produce such a beam.
The most probable
direction of anti-matter particles (likely anti-protons) emanating from Z=115 upon
bombardment by high-engery protons is parallel to the incoming proton beam. By
some magic, Lazar's reactor is able to bend the anti-matter beam 90 degrees
downward. On earth, huge magnetic fields are required to keep anti-matter from
touching the walls of any (normal-matter) container it is in so as not to
annihilate prematurely. These are nowhere in evidence in Lazar's model.
Apparently the
anti-matter particles are directed downward through a high vacuum and directly
onto a "gaseous target" where they annihilate and heat is created.
Lazar fails to inform us how to keep the gaseous target from being sucked up
into the high vacuum. The heat so created is fed via the gas to a 100%
efficient thermionic heat-to-electricity converter, thus completely skirting
Carnot's heat-cycle thermodynamic law. The end-product, electricity, is
supposedly used to power the gravity wave amplifiers (see above). Surely beings
as advanced as those who designed this system would have found a better way of
creating the necessary energy to drive the system.
Summary
Comments
Post a Comment