a really cool and brilliant write-up at http://www.think-
aboutit.com/Misc/zpe4.html

- rajesh


a cut-and-paste of that write-up:


Everything for Nothing
by Harold Puthoff


Classical physics tells us that if we think of an atom as a miniature
solar system with electronic planets orbiting a nuclear sun, then it
should not exist. The circling electrons SHOULD RADIATE AWAY their
energy like microscopic radio antennas and spiral into the nucleus.
To resolve this problem, physicists had to introduce a set of
mathematical rules, called quantum mechanics, to describe what
happens. Quantum theory endows matter and energy with both wave and
particle-like characteristics. It also restrains electrons to
particular orbits, or energy levels, so they cannot radiate energy
unless they jump from one orbit to another.

Measuring the spectral lines of atoms verifies that quantum theory is
correct. Atoms appear to emit or absorb packets of light, or photons,
with a wavelength that exactly coincides with the difference between
its energy levels as predicted by quantum theory. As a result, the
majority of physicists are content simply to use quantum rules that
describe so accurately what happens in their experiments.

Nevertheless, when we repeat the question: "But why doesn't the
electron radiate away its energy?", the answer is: "Well, in quantum
theory it JUST DOESN'T". It is at this point that not only the layman
but also some physicists begin to feel that someone is not playing
fair. Indeed, much of modern physics is based on theories couched in
a form that works but they do not answer the fundamental questions of
what gravity is, why the Universe is the way it is, or how it got
started anyway. Surprisingly, there may be answers to these seemingly
unanswerable questions. Perhaps even more surprising, the answers
seem to be emerging from empty space, the vacuum, the void.

In fact, according to quantum theory, the vacuum, the space between
particles of matter as well as between the stars, is not empty, it is
filled with vast amounts of fluctuating energy.

To understand this extraordinary idea, we will have to take a detour
into the phenomenon of "fluctuations" with which quantum theory
abounds. Fluctuations arise as one of the most fundamental concepts
to come out of the mathematics of quantum theory. This is the
uncertainty principle enunciated by Werner Heisenberg in 1927, which
says that it is impossible to know everything about a system because
of what would seem to be inherent fluctuations in the very fabric of
nature itself. Indeed, quantum mechanics is a statistical theory that
deals with probabilities and it has some profound consequences for
our understanding of reality. For instance, we cannot know the
position and the momentum of an electron at the same time. If we know
its momentum, or energy, accurately, then we can determine its
position only probabilistically.

This "fuzziness" of positions described in terms of probability waves
gives a measure of the size and shape over which an electronic orbit
fluctuates in an atom. It also means that the energy of a particle or
system is "fuzzy" and thus there is a slight probability of it
changing, or fluctuating, to another value. In fact, a system can
actually, by fluctuation, "tunnel" through an energy barrier because
there is a small but finite probability of the system existing on the
other side of the barrier. I shall discuss later a possible cause for
such fluctuation phenomena.

The adjective zero-point denotes that such motion exists even at a
temperature of absolute zero where no thermal agitation effects
remain. Although we cannot observe the zero-point energy on, say, the
pendulum of a grandfather clock because it is so minute, it is
nonetheless real. In many physical systems this has important
consequences. One example is the presence of a certain amount
of "noise" in a microwave receiver that can NEVER be removed, no
matter how perfect the technology.

This zero-point energy is the result of the unpredicatable random
fluctuations of the vacuum energy, as predicted by the uncertainty
principle, which is zero in classical theory. In fact, these
fluctuations can be intense enough TO CAUSE PARTICLES TO FORM from
the vacuum SPONTANEOUSLY, provided they disappear again before
violating the uncertainty principle. This temporary formation
of "virtual" particles is somewhat akin to the spray that forms near
a turbulent waterfall. (also termed "quantum foam"....Vangard)

Of all the zero-point fluctuation phenomena, the zero-point
fluctuations of electromagnetic energy are the most easy to detect.
Electromagnetic waves have standing, or travelling modes, that are a
bit like the various modes of waves going along a rope that is
shaken. Each set of waves has its own characteristic set of nodes and
crests. It turns out that even though the zero-point energy in any
particular mode of an electromagnetic field is minute (equivalent to
half a photon's worth), there are nearly an infinite number of
possible modes of propagation, that is frequencies and directions.
The zero-point energy ADDED UP OVER ALL POSSIBLE MODES, therefore, is
QUITE ENORMOUS. As hard as it is to believe, it is greater than the
energy density in the atomic nucleus. And this in all of the so-
called "empty" space around us.

Because the zero-point energy of the electromagnetic fields is so
large, you might expect to see its effects easily, but this is not
the case because its density is very uniform. Just as a vase standing
in a true void is not likely to fall over spontaneously, so a vase
bombarded UNIFORMLY on all sides by packets of zero-point energy
would not do likewise because of the BALANCED CONDITIONS of the
uniform bombardment. The only evidence of such a barrage of energy
might be minute jiggling of the vase. Such a mechanism is thought to
be involved in the quantum JIGGLE of zero-point motions.

There are situations, however, where the uniformity of the
electromagnetic zero-point energy is slightly disturbed and this
leads to effects you can ACTUALLY MEASURE. One situation is when the
zero-point energy perturbs slightly the spectra of lines from
transitions between quantum levels in atoms. This perturbation is
known as the LAMB SHIFT, named after the American physicist, Willis
Lamb. This work carried out in the late 1940's, using techniques
developed for wartime radar, showed that the effect of zero-point
fluctuations of the electromagnetic field was to jiggle the electrons
slightly in their atomic orbits, leading to a shift in frequency of
transitions of about 1000 MEGAHERTZ.

Another, also named after its discoverer, is the CASIMIR EFFECT ­
which predicts that two metal plates close together ATTRACT EACH
OTHER. Consider plates set at a certain distance apart. In the space
between the plates, only those vacuum fluctuations for which a whole
number of half-waves just spans the distance can exist, just like
waves formed by shaking a rope tied at both ends. Outside the plates,
the fluctuations can have many more values because there is more
space. The number of modes outside the plates, all of which carry
energy and momentum, is greater than those inside. This imbalance
PUSHES THE PLATES TOGETHER. (the metal plates would thus serve as a
ZPE refractor, see NEUTRAL 1 on KeelyNet....Vangard)


                               ___           ___
                               | |           | |
                               | |           | |
                           \\  | |           | |  //
                            \\ | |           | | //
            ZPE   ___________\\| |           | |//__________ ZPE
            Push  -----------//| |           | |\\---------- Push
                            // | |           | | \\
                           //  | |           | |  \\
                               | |           | |
                               | |           | |
                               |_|           |_|


Metal Plates

   The Casimir Effect: An imbalance in the quantum fluctuations of
empty space can PUSH two metal plates together


What does this have to do with our basic question of why the electron
in a simple hydrogen atom does not radiate as it circles the protons
in its lowest-energy orbit? I have considered this point by taking
into account what other physicists have learned over the years about
the effects of zero-point energy. I discovered that you can consider
the electron as continually radiating away its energy as predicted by
classical theory, but SIMULTANEOUSLY ABSORBING a COMPENSATING AMOUNT
of energy from the ever-present sea of zero-point energy in which the
atom is immersed. An equilibrium between these two processes leads to
the correct values for the parameters that define the lowest energy,
or ground-state orbit (see "Why atoms don't collapse," NEW SCIENTIST,
July 1987). Thus there is a DYNAMIC EQUILIBRIUM in which the zero-
point energy stabilises the electron in a set ground-state orbit. It
seems that the very stability of matter itself appears to depend on
an underlying sea of electromagnetic zero-point energy.




----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------

Gravity as a Long-Range Casimir Force

As well as providing new insights into quantum theory, zero-point
fluctuations also give us some insight into gravity. Einstein's
general theory of relativity describes gravity well but we still do
not know its fundamental nature very well. The theory is basically
descriptive without revealing the underlying dynamics for that
description. As a result, attempts to unify gravity with the other
forces (electromagnetic, strong and weak nuclear forces) or to
develop a quantum theory of gravity have foundered again and again on
difficulties that can be traced back to a lack of understanding at a
fundamental level. To rectify these difficulties, theorists have
resorted to ever-increasing levels of mathematical sophistication and
abstraction, as in the recent development of supergravity and
superstring theories.

The well-known Soviet physicist Andrei Sakharov took a completely
different tack to explain such difficulties. He suggested that
gravity might not be a fundamental interaction at all, but rather a
secondary or RESIDUAL effect associated with other, non-gravitational
fields. Gravity might be an effect brought about by changes in the
zero-point energy of the vacuum, due to the presence of matter ("A
key to understanding gravity", NEW SCIENTIST, April 1981). If
correct, you could then consider gravity as a variation on the
Casimir theme, in which the pressures of background zero-point energy
were again responsible. Although Sakharov did not develop the concept
much further, he did outline certain criteria such a theory would
have to meet ­ for example, predicting the value of the gravitational
constant G in terms of the parameters given by zero-point energy
theory.

I have studied Sakharov's approach to gravity in detail with some
positive results. A particle sitting in the sea of electromagnetic
zero-point fluctuations develops a "jitter" motion, or ZITTERBEWEGUNG
as German physicists have named it. When there are two or more
particles, they are each influenced not only by the fluctuating
background field, but also by the fields generated by the other
particles, all similarly undergoing Zitterbewegung motion. The
coupling between particles due to these fields produces the
attractive gravitational force. Gravity can, therefore, be understood
as a sort of LONG-RANGE Casimir force.

Because of its electromagnetic underpinning, gravitational theory in
this form constitutes what is known as an "already-unified" theory.
The main benefit of the new approach is that it helps us to
understand characteristics of the way gravity works that were
previously unexplained. These include why gravity is so weak; why
positive but not negative mass exists; and the fact that gravity
cannot be shielded because zero-point fluctuations pervade space and
so cannot be shielded.

So, if we have an explanation for non-radiating atomic ground states
and for gravity, do we know where the electromagnetic zero-point
energy comes from in the first place? There are two schools of
thought. One is that it is just simply a part of the boundary
conditions of our Universe like, for example, the background
radiation left over from the big bang. The other is that the zero-
point energy is generated by quantum-fluctuation motion of the
charged particles of the latter. I assumed that zero-point fields
drive the motion throughout the Universe, in turn, generate the zero-
point fields in the form of a self-regenerating feedback cycle, not
unlike a cat chasing its own tail.

This self-consistent approach yielded the correct values for the zero-
point field. Thus, the zero-point fields observed at any given point
are due to random radiation arriving from particles throughout the
Unverse that are themselves undergoing zero-point motion ("Where does
the zero-point energy come from?", NEW SCIENTIST, December 2, 1989).

These self-regenerating zero-point fields also produce the familiar
properties of quantum theory, such as fluctuation phenomena and the
uncertainty principle, for example. This means that it might be
possible to model many aspects of quantum theory on the basis of self-
consistent, random interactions between particles and the zero-point
fluctuation fields they generate.

Although a knowledge of zero-point fields emerged from quantum
physics as that subject matured, Timothy Boyer at City College in New
York took a contrary view. In the late 1960's, he began asking what
would happen if we took classical physics as it was and introduced a
background of random, classical fluctuating zero-point fields. Such
fields would presumably have originated in the initial random
processes of the big bang and then by regeneration as I have just
described. Could such an all-classical model reproduce quantum theory
in its entirety, and might this possibility have been overlooked by
the founders of quantum theory who were not aware of the existence of
such a fluctuating background field?

Boyer began by tackling the problems that led to quantum theory being
introduced in the first place, such as the blackbody radiation curve
and the photoelectric effect. His upstart, neoclassical approach
reproduced the known quantum results one by one. This approach is
called STOCHASTIC ELECTRODYNMAICS (SED), in contrast to QUANTUM
ELECTRODYNAMICS (QED). Indeed, Peter Milonni at the Los Alamos
National Labroratory in the US noted in a review of the Boyer work
that if physicists in 1900 had thought of taking this route, they
would probably have been more comfortable with this classical
approach than with Max Planck's hypothesis of the quantum. One can
only speculate as to the direction that physics would have taken
them.

The list of topics successfully analysed using the SED approach,
which produce THE SAME RESULTS as when the QED approach is used, has
now been extended to include the harmonic oscillator, Casimir and van
der Waals forces and the thermal effects of acceleration through the
vacuum.

Out of this work emerged the reasons for such phenomena as the
uncertainty principle, the fluctuating motion of particles, the
existence of van der Waals forces even at zero temperature, and so
forth, all show to be due to the influence of the unceasing activity
of the random background fields.

There are also some notable gaps in the development of SED; for
example, deriving Schrodinger's equation, as yet turns out to be an
intractable problem. Several researchers are confident, however, that
this obstacle can be overcome. Until theory as we have come to know
it will be entirely replaced by a refurbished classical theory in the
near future.

But regardless of the final outcome, the successes to date of the SED
approach, by its highlighting of the role of background zero-point
fluctuations, means that when the final chapter is written on quantum
theory, field fluctuations in empty space will be accorded an
honoured position.

And now to the biggest question of all, where did the Universe come
from? Or, in modern terminology, what started the big bang? Could
quantum fluctuations of empty space have something to do with this as
well?

Edward Tyron of the City University of New York thought so in 1973
when he proposed that our Universe may have originated as a
fluctuation of the vacuum on a large scale, as "simply one of those
things which happen from time to time".

This idea was later refined and updated within the context of
inflationary cosmology by Alexander Vilenkin of Tufts University, who
proposed that the universe is created by quantum tunnelling from
literally nothing into the something we call the Universe. Although
highly speculative, these models indicate that physicists find
themselves turning again and again to the void and fluctuations
therein for their answers.

Those with a practical bent of mind may be left with yet one more
unanswered question. Can you find mundane applications for this
emerging Rosetta Stone of physics? Will it be possible to extract
electrical energy from the vacuum? Robert Forward at Hughes Research
Laboratories in Malibu, California has considered this possibility.
Could the engineer of the future specialise in "vacuum engineering"
as the Nobel laureate Tsun-Dao Lee has put it? Could the energy
crises be solved by harnessing the energies of the zero-point "sea"?
After all, the basic form of zero-point energy is highly random and
tends to cancel itself out, so if a way could be found to bring order
out of chaos, then, because of the highly energetic nature of the
vacuum fluctuations, relatively large effects could be produced.

Given our relative ignorance at this point, we must fall back on a
quote given by the Soviet science historian Roman Poldolny when
contemplating this issue. "It would be just as presumptuous to deny
the feasibility of useful application as it would be irresponsible to
guarantee such application." Only the future can reveal the ultimate
use to which humans will put this remaining fire of the gods, the
quantum fluctuations of empty space.

Harold Puthoff is a theoretical physicist at the Institute for
Advanced Studies at Austin in Texas. He specialises in Quantum
Electrodynamics.

Further Reading

"The classical vacuum", SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN Timothy Boyer, August
1985, p. 70

"Is the vacuum really empty?", AMERICAN SCIENTIST Walter Greiner and
Joseph Hamilton, March-April 1980, p. 154

Something Called Nothing ­ Physical Vacuum, What is it? Roman Podolny,
MIR, 1986

hi

stuff on evolution presented in www.thedarwinpapers.com makes the
most sense to me.

bright wishes to all
rajesh

Wonderful!!! One thing sounds strange for me, Your Website address is
lahoreinfo.com!!!May everyone know the reason???

-----Original Message-----
From: Sachin Pilankar [mailto:sacsansus@...]
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 10:45 AM
To: Astronomy
Subject: [extramural2002] About the 88 Constellations


Dear friends

Thanks Nitin, who says that I am second Sachin after
Sachin Tendulkar.

I found that I don't have any extra information about
the 88 Constellations (places in sky). So, from last
few days I have collected the information and history
about the 88 Constellations. Because I think we must
want to know that, why our historians are given the
specific name to particular part of sky. We only know
that, they have given the names to find the position
of star of planets, but we don't know, what is the
history behind that.

I have made the 'Second Edition of My Astronomical
Collection CD'. In that CD, you will find the more
videos, pictures, information and free Astronomical
Softwares.

In this Second Edition, I have put information and
history, specially about 88 Constellations. Those who
are interested please give me BLANK CD on our next
lecture.

And those who are already having this CD's, if they
want, please give me another BLANK CD, (believe me
this is last edition, because I will not make any
Third Edition CD. So don't worry about, because I will
not ask you for next another CD for my Third Edition
after few days.)

I also found that, those who are having this
Astronomical CD, are having some problem to explore
(how to use) CD. I have put the programme in 'Second
Edition CD', which teach you, how to explore the CD.

Namaste
Sachin Pilankar
www.lahoreinfo.com


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
extramural2002-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Dear friends

Thanks Nitin, who says that I am second Sachin after
Sachin Tendulkar.

I found that I don’t have any extra information about
the 88 Constellations (places in sky). So, from last
few days I have collected the information and history
about the 88 Constellations. Because I think we must
want to know that, why our historians are given the
specific name to particular part of sky. We only know
that, they have given the names to find the position
of star of planets, but we don’t know, what is the
history behind that.

I have made the ‘Second Edition of My Astronomical
Collection CD’. In that CD, you will find the more
videos, pictures, information and free Astronomical
Softwares.

In this Second Edition, I have put information and
history, specially about 88 Constellations. Those who
are interested please give me BLANK CD on our next
lecture.

And those who are already having this CD’s, if they
want, please give me another BLANK CD, (believe me
this is last edition, because I will not make any
Third Edition CD. So don’t worry about, because I will
not ask you for next another CD for my Third Edition
after few days.)

I also found that, those who are having this
Astronomical CD, are having some problem to explore
(how to use) CD. I have put the programme in ‘Second
Edition CD’, which teach you, how to explore the CD.

Namaste
Sachin Pilankar
www.lahoreinfo.com


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com

Dear friends

We learned that there is very difficult and
complicated mathematical calculations to find out in
which constellation (particular place in sky) any
particular planet have found. Still our group is only
able to find the where the ‘Sun’ and ‘Moon’ are
located, but to find exact position of both, we should
want to see them on that time.

Our Astronomy teachers are always saying that, they
have use the ‘PANCHANG’ to find out the exact position
of planets in the sky. And for that reason I met Mr.
Mohan Apte (our first lecturer of Extra Mural Class),
and they teach me how the see the place of planets in
‘PANCHANG’. You will also find out the exact place of
planets in past or future.

This mail is especially for those who are really
interested to know that ‘How to use PANCHANG’, will
please come at 9.30 on our next lecture, which is on
August 4, 2002.

Unfortunately (for those who don’t understand
Marathi), I know how to use Marathi PANCHANG. And I
have only Marathi PANCHANG.

Please come with the copy of Gujarathi, English or
Hindi PANCHANG, those who are already having a
PANCHANG at home. Please don’t purchase, if you don’t
have.

Namaste
Sachin Pilankar
www.lahoreinfo.com



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com

Hi!
friends I had received the collection of Sachin
Pilankar on C.D..
  It is Too Too good.
Infact I would say he is Second  sachin After Sachin
Tendulkar who has made me so much happy..
I really suggest that u should try to see it.
see u
nitin




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com

Hi Suyog

Hope you are feeling well now. Do take care of your health.

The next lecture (Aug 4) is on "Time in Astronomy" by Hemant Mone.

What you missed (July 28) was the one on "Observational Techniques" by Abhay
Deshpande that covered the following:
1. Distance in Astronomy
     - Units of measurement: metre, astronomic Uuit (au), light year and parsec.
     - For inner planets, external planets and stars
2. Magnitude
     - apparent and absolute

Hope to see you fit and attending the next lecture.

Regards
Rajesh


----- Original Message -----
From: "suyog pisat" <suyogpisat@...>
To: <extramural2002@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2002 12:17 PM
Subject: [extramural2002] next lecture


hi everybody,
        i am suyog one of your classmate of the
extramural lectures. actually unfortunately i missed
the lecture on last sunday i.e 28th july as i was ill.
so can anybody please mail me what is the next
schedule of our lecture so that i can't miss it .also
can anybody please send me what i missed the last
lecture.
                                       regards ,

                                                suyog

hi everybody,
        i am suyog one of your classmate of the
extramural lectures. actually unfortunately i missed
the lecture on last sunday i.e 28th july as i was ill.
so can anybody please mail me what is the next
schedule of our lecture so that i can't miss it .also
can anybody please send me what i missed the last
lecture.
                                       regards ,

                                                suyog


________________________________________________________________________
Want to sell your car? advertise on Yahoo Autos Classifieds. It's Free!!
        visit http://in.autos.yahoo.com

Dear friends

Please visit the URL to get complete info about the
‘Comets & Meteor Showers’.


Website: http://comets.amsmeteors.org/


Bye
Sachin
www.lahoreinfo.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com

All About Our Extramural

             ---Some Future Happenings---

          We are going to Request some of our Teachers
to share valuable info with our Group Regularly .

          We are trying to get in touch with some of
the  previous Batch Students of Extramural to share
some of their Experiences about "After Effects of
Extramural Course".

           We are tring to get more tips on How We can
utilies Our present course to best of our
capacity,with the help of some of the senior teachers.

           If any one has some interesting feasible
idea ,about making our study better,please share

yours in Extramural
nitin

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com

Thanks so much, Kaustubh.

Will wait for the last one.

I am sure I have follow-up questions and more new questions. Will pose them in
due course.

Regards
Rajesh


----- Original Message -----
From: "A, Kaustubh" <Kaustubh.A@...>
To: <extramural2002@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 9:05 PM
Subject: RE: [extramural2002] questions on gravity


Hi,

To be very precise, It's a force of attraction that exists between any two
objects that have mass.  The more mass they have, the greater the force of
attraction.  The closer they are, the greater the force of attraction. The force
of attraction between you and the planet Earth is a noticeable force! We call
the force of attraction between you and the Earth, your weight.  Weight is
another name for the force of gravity pulling down on you or anything else.


   G is the universal gravitational constant.  It is basically a conversion
factor to adjust the number and units so they come out to the correct value.
This is a universal constant so it is true everywhere.

Gravity can be metered with gyroscope and Gravity is measured in Newtons(N) or
kg m s-1.

The surface gravity of the 9 planets in the solar system
Mercury 3.7 N
Venus 8.87 N
Earth 9.78 N
Mars 3.69 N
Jupiter 23.12 N
Saturn 10.43 N
Uranus 8.87 N
Neptune 11.15 N
Pluto 0.66 N

Gravity is not constant entire the universe. ill try to find out answers for
your last Q.

thanks
Kaustubh.

Hi,

To be very precise, It's a force of attraction that exists between any two
objects that have mass.  The more mass they have, the greater the force of
attraction.  The closer they are, the greater the force of attraction. The force
of attraction between you and the planet Earth is a noticeable force! We call
the force of attraction between you and the Earth, your weight.  Weight is
another name for the force of gravity pulling down on you or anything else.


   G is the universal gravitational constant.  It is basically a conversion
factor to adjust the number and units so they come out to the correct value. 
This is a universal constant so it is true everywhere.

Gravity can be metered with gyroscope and Gravity is measured in Newtons(N) or
kg m s-1.

The surface gravity of the 9 planets in the solar system
Mercury 3.7 N
Venus 8.87 N
Earth 9.78 N
Mars 3.69 N
Jupiter 23.12 N
Saturn 10.43 N
Uranus 8.87 N
Neptune 11.15 N
Pluto 0.66 N

Gravity is not constant entire the universe. ill try to find out answers for
your last Q.

thanks
Kaustubh.

-----Original Message-----
From: rgajra@... [mailto:rgajra@...]
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 5:36 PM
To: extramural2002@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [extramural2002] questions on gravity



Hi all

As a non-science guy, I will appreciate if any of you can throw light on some
queries I have on gravity:

1. How would you describe the force of gravity to be? Is it an electro-magnetic
force or something else?

2. How is it formed?

3. How is gravity measured? Through an instrument? Where has it derived its
numerical value from? What is the basis of this number?

4. What is the uninversal constant of gravity? Why is it universal and why is it
constant? I have read reports that in certain regions near the mountains on our
planet, the effect of gravity is less. If gravity is constant in the entire
universe how is this explained?

There are many more queries I have on gravity. But as of now I ask for help on
the above four.

Thanks.

Regards
Rajesh




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
extramural2002-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Hi all

As a non-science guy, I will appreciate if any of you can throw light on some
queries I have on gravity:

1. How would you describe the force of gravity to be? Is it an electro-magnetic
force or something else?

2. How is it formed?

3. How is gravity measured? Through an instrument? Where has it derived its
numerical value from? What is the basis of this number?

4. What is the uninversal constant of gravity? Why is it universal and why is it
constant? I have read reports that in certain regions near the mountains on our
planet, the effect of gravity is less. If gravity is constant in the entire
universe how is this explained?

There are many more queries I have on gravity. But as of now I ask for help on
the above four.

Thanks.

Regards
Rajesh

Thanks for the offer, Sachin.

- Rajesh


From: "Sachin Pilankar" <sacsansus@...>
To: "Astronomy" <extramural2002@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 1:07 PM
Subject: [extramural2002] My Astronomical Collection


Dear friends

Hi! To all, especially to Nitin Mekhiya.

I am Sachin Pilankar, I am working in one Private
Company, teaching computer at my home (in my own
institute), and Astronomy is my hobby.

I have collected so many information, pictures,
videos, etc. on Astronomy and I would like to share
all these data with everyone.

I have also compiled one CD for Astronomy studies
(where you will found total information on Astronomy,
thousands of pictures and videos and other
information). I know that, everyone all of you, have
not able to get the Internet connection for 24 hours
for collect the Astronomical data. So I have suggest
all of you, those who have interested to get my
Astronomy collection CD, It's 'FREE' but only you want
to give me one 'BLANK' CD in our next lecture on July
28, 2002. I will return all CD's on August 4, 2002's
lecture.

I am also working my own site www.lahoreinfo.com to
make an 'Astronomical site'.

(Note: My English is not good, so please ignore my
grammatical mistakes)

Bye
Sachin Pilankar

Hello! Mayuri Kokate

I have given below the link of one Indian
Organisation, I think there you will found the career
in ‘Aeronautics’ or ‘Astronautics’.


Indian Space Research Organisation
Antariksh Bhavan
New BEL Road, Bangalore 560 094, INDIA
Phone: +91- 80-341 5275 & 341 5474
Fax: +91-80-341 2253
Website: http://www.isro.org
E-mail: info@...


You must see the ‘Training Facilities’ section on this
site they are given many links related to them.

I am unable locate any address of its branch here in
Mumbai, you should want to contact and get the detail.

Bye
Sachin
www.lahoreinfo.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com

DEAR FRIENDS,

                          I AM A JUNIOR COLLEGE STUDENT.I WANT SOME INFORMATION REGARDING THE TRAINING OF AERONAUTICS OR ASTRONAUTICS IN INDIA ITSELF.WHAT SHALL I DO AFTER GETTING THROUGH WITH HSC.IF YOU HAVE ,DO GIVE ME A DETAILED INFORMATIONS OF THE INSTITUTIONS AND SO ON.

                                                          THANKING YOU ALL IN ANTICIPATION.          

> Hello All,
>
> Its very nice to be a member of this group! Thanks! Well let me start
interacting with all with informing you something useful.
> I have found the website of Indian Institute of Science and they have
following online publications:
>
> http://www.ias.ac.in/journals.html
> http://www.ias.ac.in/jaa/index.html   this is a journal of Astrophysics and
Astronomy.
>
>
> Thanks and Regards,
>
>
> Kaustubh A.
> Technical Consultant -HP Services, INDIA.
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\
---
> Compaq Computers Part of New HP India.
> 101-105 Enterprise Center, CTS#55 Off Neharu Road,
> Vile Parle (East) Mumbai 400099.
> *+91 (0) 22.616.7331 *GSM: +91.982.111.6028
> *:   kaustubh.a@...
> URL:  http://www.hp.com/in
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\
---
>
>
>

Dear friends

Hi! To all, especially to Nitin Mekhiya.

I am Sachin Pilankar, I am working in one Private
Company, teaching computer at my home (in my own
institute), and Astronomy is my hobby.

I have collected so many information, pictures,
videos, etc. on Astronomy and I would like to share
all these data with everyone.

I have also compiled one CD for Astronomy studies
(where you will found total information on Astronomy,
thousands of pictures and videos and other
information). I know that, everyone all of you, have
not able to get the Internet connection for 24 hours
for collect the Astronomical data. So I have suggest
all of you, those who have interested to get my
Astronomy collection CD, It’s ‘FREE’ but only you want
to give me one ‘BLANK’ CD in our next lecture on July
28, 2002. I will return all CD’s on August 4, 2002’s
lecture.

I am also working my own site www.lahoreinfo.com to
make an ‘Astronomical site’.


(Note: My English is not good, so please ignore my
grammatical mistakes)

Bye
Sachin Pilankar


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com

Dear Nitin

Thanks a lot for creating this group.

I guess this will help all of us, to share views, nots and more
information.

Thanks a lot and wishing all thew very best for the group

Warm Regards

LALIT DABHOLKAR

Hello

Please visit visit
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/extramural2002

and edit your membership settings according to your
choice(viz- u want to receive mails or u check on site
,etc. )

  .Also update your profile so that others can know
more about you.
See You
Nitin

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com

http://www.metaresearch.org/publications/books/PushingG.asp



Overview of "Pushing Gravity: New perspectives on Le Sage's theory of
gravitation

by Tom Van Flandern / Meta Research



This is a 316-page soft cover book published in April 2002 by C. Roy
Keys Inc., http://redshift.vif.com. It contains 22 articles/papers on
various aspects of a 300-year-old idea about the nature of gravity,
showing that it not only survives to the present day, but thrives.
The editor is Matthew Edwards, who also contributed two of the
chapters.

The book opens with a Foreword by Halton Arp providing momentum for
the rest of the book. Arp points out that the curved space-time
interpretation of general relativity lacks causality, and Le Sage-
type models are our only current viable alternatives that at least
respect the causality principle.

James Evans eases us into the subject with his historical perspective
article about sources, construction and reception of the Le Sage
model. Here we learn the "bare essence" of Le Sage's inspiration. The
universe is filled with "ultra-mundane corpuscles" of very small size
and very high speed that constantly impinge upon matter. On Earth,
the apple falls from the tree, not because something from the Earth
pulls it down, but because more corpuscles strike the apple from
above than from below because the Earth absorbs and blocks some
corpuscles from below. Two bodies in space likewise shadow one
another from some corpuscle impacts, with the result that the
corpuscles that do impact produce a net force on the outward-facing
sides of the bodies, pushing them toward one another. From this mode
of action, we see the origin of the title of this book: "pushing
gravity".

Matthew Edwards discusses the brief revival of Le Sage's model in the
late 19th century, spearheaded by Lord Kelvin. The debates on this
subject among Kelvin, Maxwell, and other contemporaries are classic
science, with each side making telling arguments. But ultimately, the
theory was swept away by the advance of Einstein's general relativity
in the early 20th century.

This reviewer's own chapter provides the most complete exposition of
how Le Sagian gravity produces all the features of Newtonian and
Einstein gravitation, and several more features presently
unrecognized by physics as well. The key to understanding the
phenomena and answering objections is to recognize the need for two
different media operating on vastly different scales, a "light-
carrying medium" and a graviton medium. This chapter includes the
modified Newtonian formulas needed to compute these effects, together
with numerical estimates of the new constants in the formulas. These
include a gravitational shielding coefficient, a graviton drag
coefficient, and a finite-range parameter. The chapter proceeds to
show how this picture fits into a broader cosmological and quantum
physics context. For example, it leads to a natural mechanism for
redshifting light as it travels, providing an alternative to an
expanding universe. It also offers an alternative to the as-yet-
undiscovered "dark matter", which need not exist after all. It
eliminates the singularity when matter collapses to an ultra-dense
state (i.e., no more "black holes" as such, although high-matter-
density objects still exist). And it introduces enough heat energy to
readily explode planets if anything were to interfere with the
efficient flow of graviton-heated light-carrying medium from
planetary interiors. A list of historical objections to Le Sage-type
models and their resolutions is also presented.

The immediately following paper by Victor Slabinski nicely
complements the paper just described. A Le Sage-type mathematical
graviton model is developed rigorously to the point where we see
relationships between fundamental parameters such as the mass, speed,
flux density, and absorption and scattering coefficients for
gravitons, and the more familiar physical parameters such as the
universal gravitational constant, the heat absorbed by matter, and
the drag on planetary motions. The chapter ends with numerical
constraints on the various parameters, and shows that Le Sage-type
models are viable because of the absence of contradiction among the
constraints.

Other authors envision the mechanism of gravity operating a bit
differently, and often try to develop models around a single medium,
with varying degrees of success. Kierein suggests a background of
very long wavelength radiation as the cause. Editor Edwards suggests
that a background of electromagnetic radiation induces gravitation
only in bodies that are in motion relative to the background (e.g.
rotating galaxies), due to the form of the relativistic Doppler
effect that applies in a preferred reference frame. And Mingst and
Stowe show that at least the Newtonian gravitation formula can be
derived generically without a specific mechanism.

A few papers show the development of thinking about such models,
although they invoke specifics that have since been discredited or at
least made highly dubious. Reference to the "Pioneer anomalous
acceleration" would fall into that category, as would the Allais
pendulum effect, and the notion that anything responsible for
gravitational force can propagate as slowly as lightspeed.

Near the end of the book, we find historical efforts to detect Le
Sage-associated gravitational effects such as gravitational
shielding. Some of this material is of current value and some of it
purely historical. The book concludes with several chapters of a
miscellaneous character that do not fit well elsewhere, again with a
largely historical emphasis.

This book is excellent both for looking back at how physics evolved
to where it is today, and for looking forward to where physics may be
headed during the coming century. The subtitle's "new perspectives"
are here in abundance.

Many of today's physicists have not looked or even thought beyond
the "curved space-time" explanation for gravitation. Those who have,
realize that a curvature cannot be a cause of a motion unless a force
acts. For example, in the classical "rubber sheet analogy", a small
body on the side of a dent in a rubber sheet made by a large mass
will not start rolling downhill unless there is already gravity under
the rubber sheet to give meaning to "downhill" and provide a force.
But that defeats the purpose of the analogy as an explanation for the
cause of gravity. Anyone interested in a serious-yet-easy-to-grasp
causal mechanism for gravitation will find this book essential
reading.

[Note: This is an important book, but published in Canada and not
widely publicized. So Meta Research has decided to make this book
available to its members and subscribers. See order information at
the "Publications" tab, follow link to Memberships and Store.]

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/cgi-
bin/texis/webinator/printall?/Study/Lights3/lights_carbon4.html

http://www3.cosmiverse.com/news/space/0702/space07190204.html



Sun Is Made of Iron, Not Hydrogen
July 19, 2002 08:30 CDT

Scientists have long believed that the sun was composed of an
enormous mass of hydrogen. Not everyone bought this theory, though,
and for the last 40-years Dr. Manuel Oliver has been preaching his
theory of the creation of our solar system instead.

Manuel's hypothesis on how the planets formed is very different. He
believes that the solar system was born out of a catastrophic
explosion - a very different interpretation of the data than that of
his fellow scientists. The conventional belief among astrophysicists
is that the sun and the planets were formed 4.5 billion years ago in
a relatively ambiguous, innocuous cloud of interstellar dust.

Manuel has clung stubbornly to his belief that it simply didn't
happen that way, and data recently collected is starting to imply
that in the end, he may be right.


Iron and the heavy element known as xenon are the cornerstones of his
different beliefs. They are integral to why he hypothesizes that the
solar system had a very different beginning. Here's his version of
what happened:

He believes a supernova rocked our area of the Milky Way galaxy some
five billion years ago, giving birth to all the heavenly bodies that
populate the solar system. Analyses of meteorites reveal that all
primordial helium is accompanied by "strange xenon," he says, adding
that both helium and strange xenon came from the outer layer of the
supernova that created the solar system. Helium and strange xenon are
also seen together in Jupiter.

Manuel admits that hydrogen fusion creates some of the sun's heat -
as hydrogen (the lightest of all elements) moves up to the sun's
surface. But the real heat, he says, comes from the core of an
exploded supernova that continues to generate energy within the iron-
rich interior of the sun, Manuel says.

"We think that the solar system came from a single star, and the sun
formed on a collapsed supernova core," Manuel said. "The inner
planets are made mostly of matter produced in the inner part of that
star, and the outer planets of material form the outer layers of that
star."

He hasn't been the only salmon swimming upstream all these years.
Manuel first began to develop his theory in 1972. He and his
colleagues had their theory published in the British journal Nature
In 1975 he and another UMR researcher named Dr. Dwarka Das Sabu first
proposed that the solar system formed from the debris of a spinning
star that exploded as a supernova. They based their claim on studies
of meteorites and moon samples, which showed traces of strange xenon.

NASA's Galileo probe would seem to support his hypothesis. The probe
of Jupiter's helium-rich atmosphere in 1996 found traces of strange
xenon gases - solid evidence against the conventional model of the
solar system's creation, Manuel declared in a press release from
University of Missouri-Rolla.

Manuel will have an opportunity to present his case in a poster
presentation entitled, "Why the Model of a Hydrogen-filled Sun is
Obsolete". Audience members will hear him out on Monday, July 21st at
the Meteoritical Society's 65th annual meeting on the University of
California-Los Angeles campus. Co-authors with Manuel are Cynthia
Bolon, a Ph.D. student in chemistry at UMR, and Aditya Katragada, a
UMR graduate student in chemistry.

Manuel believes a supernova rocked our area of the Milky Way galaxy
some five billion years ago, giving birth to all the heavenly bodies
that populate the solar system. Analyses of meteorites reveal that
all primordial helium is accompanied by "strange xenon," he says,
adding that both helium and strange xenon came from the outer layer
of the supernova that created the solar system. Helium and strange
xenon are also seen together in Jupiter.

The researchers reported that "strange xenon" is normal xenon that is
enriched in isotopes (created when a supernova explodes). It could
not be produced within meteorites.

Three years later, Manuel and Sabu found that all of the primordial
helium in meteorites is trapped in the same sites that trapped
strange xenon. Based on these findings, they concluded that the solar
system formed directly from the debris of a single supernova, and the
sun formed on the supernova's collapsed core. Giant planets like
Jupiter grew from material in the outer part of the supernova, while
Earth and the inner planets formed out of material from the
supernova's interior.

This is why the outer planets consist mostly of hydrogen, helium and
other light elements, and the inner planets are made of heavier
elements like iron, sulfur and silicon, Manuel says.

Strange xenon came from the helium-rich outer layers of the
supernova, while normal xenon came from its interior. There was no
helium in the interior because nuclear fusion reactions there changed
the helium into the heavier elements, Manuel says.

Manuel had another chance to climb up on his favorite soapbox and
share his theory this past January at the American Astronomical
Society's meeting in Washington, D.C. His paper, "The Origin of the
Solar System with an Iron-rich Sun," and other information about
Manuel's research are available on the Internet at
http://web.umr.edu/~om/.

Source: Press Release (University of Missouri-Rolla)

ET Life to be contacted in 25 years.US Scientists have claimed that
within 25 years they will be able to build instruments to spot and
contact ET Life

A very large eruption on the Sun has been imaged by SOHO and other
observatories.  Solar violence at
http://soho.nascom.nasa.gov/pickoftheweek/

A new study suggests that many of the oldest supermassive black holes
are
not as large as they appear, which reduces the problem of explaining
how
they grew so fast.  http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/press/pr0215.html

X-rays from a rare type of exploded star in the
Whirpool Galaxy were recently observed by our Chandra X-ray
Observatory.  Further study will shed more light on what happens
before,
during, and after a
supernova.  http://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/2002/0158/index.html

Dear friends

I am hoping for this group comprising of our classmates of our
ongoing June-Dec 2002 batch of Foundation Course in Basic Astronomy
to blossom into fruitful interactions among each other.

Thanks Nitin for starting this group.

Bright wishes to all
Rajesh Gajra