Recent content by henryco

Hello, I have another question related to negative energy rather than negative mass. If my understanding of QFT is correct and as far as i can check in a reference QFT book as Weinberg's one, the negative energy quantum field (creating and annihilating negative energy quanta) should be an...

I have already done what ? Fred

Hi Garth, Rethincking about it, i realize that since you give the prediction for the integrated drift on one year on this forum, my one year oscillation integrated preferred frame effect will anyway not contribute. So the better is to keep the predictions as they are and just mention that...

Hi Garth, It appears that my preferred frame effect is actually not ruled out by LLR data (it is not Lorentz violating)! So i cannot exclude this possible prediction. The theory has a preferred fram effect and th predictions crucially depend on it: The prediction for DG that i gave here (0...

Hi Garth Your comments on these results make me consider more seriously another possible prediction in my framework which i had eliminated because it is already ruled out by the 1% precision test of the geodetic effect by LusarLaserRanging. However the DG theory make it possible for a rare...

That's OK Thank you Garth Fred

Hi GArth, You again put this wrong prediction. It's a long time since i have corrected this which was just a calculus mistake (but by the way i could notice that many experts do the same kind of mistakes and this made me realize my own mistake !). My predition is still: zero frame...

Hi Garth I don't understand why you have (temporarily as it appears since you again indicate my correct zero frame dragging prediction in the most recent post), modified my predictions here? Wasn't it clear that the amendment was only to avoid people take serious the old (2005) erroneous...

Sorry but I'm just numerically translating the ellipse information that anybody can see in this plot. In a one sigma horizontal ellipse like this one, the error is half the size of the ellipse, as far as i know. So the error given in this plot by GP-B collaboration is in between 6 and 8 mas...

Very interesting indeed...but, i don't see where your 20 mas yr-1 in the MArch glimpse comes from! looking at the March ellipses i rather see something like -98 +- 7 which is more than 3 sigmas away from -75 for the two ellipses! Anyway if there are 100mas yr-1 gyro to gyro...

There are also some other details i would like to know about these effects 1) The dissipative polhod motions must after some time determine the actual rotation axis of the four gyroscopes. its direction should be a priori different and arbitrary for each one: has this information been...

Thank you garth. I have asked other questions to the GP-B website curator and were told that an upgrade will soon be available on their site with clearer plots... For the time being i don't see how i could read the amount of relativistic motion from this plot where the dashed line represents...

Hi everybody, Thank you for your efforts to help clarify several points. I still can't decode the axis informations from the plot named Torque modeling example: motion of gyro 3 in the L10028 poster. Can someone who attended the APS conf or GP-B expert help us ? regards, F H-C

hi paul I would say: 1) it depends if the y-axis actually shows a pure east-west deviation, doest it (i can't decode the y-scale)? 2) even an actual east-west effect can have another origin than frame dragging (for example if we are in the vicinity of resonance peeks as shown in the error...

OK but as far as i know frame dragging must be continuous, not only happen from time to time as isolated glimpses (or did i miss something? somebody can confirm or invalidate this?)...otherwise this has nothing to do with GR frame dragging. What on Earth does this glimpse mean? Once we admit...