UFO Self-Propulsion & Einstein's Possibly Mistaken Principle of Equivalence

Possible Disparity between the
Inertial and Gravitational Masses in Einstein"s Formulas,
according to Professor José Álvarez López,
PhD. Can this Lead to the Possibility
of Self-Propulsion?

Are two equal masses completely equivalent if one is
at rest and the other is accelerating or perhaps in a rotational
movement? Is the Gravitational Constant really a true constant
and unchanging? In this article, I inform that by correcting the
Gravitational Constant and then introducing it to Lagrange"s
equations for planetary motion José Álvarez Lopez
PhD, apparently came up with Einstein"s correct equations for
planetary motion. Thus, G at motion or changing position
(applicable to inertial mass) would not be equivalent to G at
rest (as gravitational mass).

Professor José Álvarez López
(1914-2007) held PhD"s in mathematics, Physics and Chemistry from
the University of La Plata, Argentina. In 1956 he personally
published in Cordoba, Argentina "The Time Concept in Special
Relativity," "The Concept of Mass in General
Relativity," "The Principle of Variational
Homogeneity" and "The Meaning of the Clock Paradox."
In 1961 he published "Relativistic Dimensional Analysis."
Then in 1968, Álvarez López published
"Gravitational Interference in the Einstein Effect" and
"La Thesis Electromagnetique de Poincaré-Cremieux"
(with the Faculty of Sciences at the University of Röen). In
1972 was published "Relativistic Space Propulsion" (also
in Cordoba, Argentina) and in 1976 "About the Non Existence of
Electronic Inertia in Metallic Conductors" (with the Real
Academia de las Ciencias, Madrid, Spain).

This Professor was keenly aware of the epistemological
issues raised by modern physics and didn"t hesitate to tackle
them as an experimentalist, a deductive physicist, a
mathematician and even by adventuring into less scientifically
orthodox areas of knowledge. For instance, besides orthodox works
in physics, he also wrote about more speculative matters such as
Yoga, Cybernetics, Archeology, and about the profound but
unappreciated mathematical, engineering and astronomical
knowledge apparently possessed by the ancient Hebrews and
Egyptians. As expected in a scientifist world, this got him in
trouble with many of his colleagues.

Many years ago, during a series of interviews I enjoyed
with Professor Álvarez López in Miami, Florida in
Icho Cruz, Cordoba, Argentina, Professor Álvarez
López told me that he had conducted research under the
direction of Professor Giorgio Piccardi at the Laboratory of the
Institute of Chemistry and Physics in Florence, Italy. He also
told me that he had conducted research at the Electrophysical
Technical Institute under the direction of professor Köning
in Munich, Germany; at the Institute for Advanced Studies,
directed by professor James Mc Connell in Dublin, Ireland; and in
the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, in Berkeley, California, where
he had been invited by professor Luis W. Alvarez in 1975 to
research the "Behavior of Joule"s Law in Electrical
Coronas." He also informed me that he had received positive
commentaries from Albert Einstein (shortly before his death) and
met in Paris with Count Louis de Broglie. There also were
favorable personal or letter exchanges with scientists like
Alexander Wilkens, Burnington Brown, David Bohm, William R.
Corliss, Kiril Stanjukovich, J.L. Synge and Dr. de Puymorin,
former director of France"s Space Commission.

I"m not an accredited physicist but, basically possess a
well-informed layman"s concern and -in reporting on some of my
conversations with Professor José Álvarez
López- I"m trying to bring up ideas which may still be
important to the physics community and, subsequently, to science,
metaphysics and philosophy in general. Perhaps the ideas were too
controversial during the Professor Alvarez Lopez"s lifetime but
nowadays a paradigm like the "Equivalence Principle" is
being questioned. Professor Álvarez López did
manage to publish some of his ideas in Argentina and non-English
speaking countries but, while recognized by some, was (perhaps
due to his metaphysical and epistemological interests) also
considered to be too extravagant by others who didn"t have the
time or the inclination to carefully read his work and review it.
However, perhaps the Professor"s work could still nowadays add to
our knowledge of the possibility of manipulating how objects
respond to gravity or exert gravitational forces. For instance, I
ask (hoping not to venture into the nonsensical) whether the
General Relativity formulas (under a modified Gravitational
Constant) allow for an asymmetry between inertial and
gravitational masses so that now a Coulomb Effect in
rotational masses might become a self-propulsive distortion of
space-time.

There were interesting reports of alleged discoveries.
For instance, during some personal meetings, Professor
Álvarez López told me that he and his group of
experimentalists in Argentina had developed a micrometer that
had shown that electrons didn"t possess mass in electrical
conductors. He had also apparently found that the atomic
constants were coordinated by the non- dimensional "atomic
constant" "alpha," also known as the "Fine Structure Constant."
Moreover, after learning about a strange experimental effect in
Argentina in which (after pumping DC current for several days
along an "antenna" aligned with the local geomagnetic field) the
total output of energy seemed greater than the input, and
Álvarez López allegedly conducted a partially
related experiment at Lawrence Livermore under the auspices of
Dr. Luis W. Alvarez.

Certainly, I"m not a physicist but for several decades
I"ve been pondering and gradually learning about a few relevant
issues in philosophy of science and have read a broad range of
popular books on quantum physics and cosmology. I hope that, in
reporting on some of these conversations with Professor
José Álvarez López, I"ll bring to the
attention of suitable academics ideas which –if
confirmed true– could be fundamentally important to science,
metaphysics, ontology, philosophy and humanity in
general.

I would like to present some of Professor Álvarez
López"s alleged findings that also seem to connect
Einstein"s Special and General Relativity. I"m would like to see
knowledgeable physicists review the Professor"s works (like
"Relativistic Dimensional Analysis") and verify or discard if he
was correct in concluding that Einstein overlooked a certain
disparity between Inertial Mass and Gravitational Mass. The 1961
publication titled "Relativistic Dimensional Analysis" explains
much better than I many of his ideas in relation to the issues
raised. It is a matter of finding this and other works to
carefully review them.

Here I also want to make reference to
research papers dealing with the possibility that orthodox
concepts about gravity and the Equivalence Principle can be
modified, complemented or challenged. For instance, an article
written by Japanese physicists Hideo Hayasaka and Sakae Takeuchi
titled "Anomalous Weight Reduction on a Gyroscope"s Right
Rotations about the Vertical Axis on the Earth" published in the
December 18, 1989 issue of Physical Review Letters.
Seems to show that charged rotating masses alter the
gravitational field.

I also found that the results reported by
Hayasaka and Takeuchi had been questioned in 1990 by Dr. S.H.
Salter, a mechanical engineer at the University of Edinburgh who,
(while not trying to replicate the original findings with a
similar amount of magnetic material also used) proposed that
vibrations in the ball bearings of the rotating gyro could
explain the effects. Reference: S. H. Salter, Nature, (February
4, 1990).

Nevertheless, a few years later, Hideo
Hayasaka et al. wrote an article after conducting experiments
that seem to back support the results published in 1989. It is
titled "Possibility for the Existence of Antigravity: Evidence
from a Free-Fall Experiment Using a Spinning Gyro" and was
published in Speculations in Science and Technology, 20
(173-181) (1997). The online link is
http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/tajmar/papers/Hayasaka%20-%20Possibility%20for%20the%20Existence%20of%20Anti%20Gravity_Evidence%20from%20a%20Free-Fall%20Experiment%20using%20a%20Spinning%20Gyro.pdf

Moreover, some other experiments seem to
corroborate Hayakawa and Takeuchi"s basic results, thus bringing
to question the Equivalence Principle. For example, "The
Phenomenon of Weight Reduction of a Spinning Wheel," written
by R. Waite for Mechanica: An International Journal for
Theoretical and Applied Mechanics Volume 42, Number 4,
359-364, presents an alleged general validation of the original
results.

Then again (and still related to these
issues) another article appearing in Physical Review
Letters makes the case that the Equivalence Principle may be
violated by the action of the still mysterious "Dark Energy." The
reference is "Dark Energy as a Born-Infeld Gauge Interaction
Violating the Equivalence Principle" by A. Füzfa and J.M.
Alimi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 061301 (2006). The online link is:
http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v97/i6/e061301

Then, can information be the source for space, inertia
and gravity? Read Erik P. Verlinde"s plausible and original work
'On the Origin of Gravity and the Laws of Newton' 6 January 2010,
at http://arxiv.org/abs/1001.0785 Apparently, the entropy
differences among parts in the universe would generate the
gravitational force by distributing matter to maximize overall
entropy according to the Second Law of Thermodynamics. A stronger
force would be related with a higher entropic
probability.

Could physical information be modified by human
intention interacting with an information field? According to the
former Stanford University Professor emeritus in Material Science
and Engineering, William A. Tiller PhD, the gauge symmetry of
space can be modified like this. Perhaps this would affect
information and, if information is the primary source, then
–perhaps- space, time, gravity and inertia as emergent
phenomena would also be modified. Read the "white papers" and the
"Tiller Model" or watch an interesting interview at
http://www.tillerfoundation.com/

The Gravitational Coupling (adimensional)
Constant (GCC) comes to mind as it pertains to how
charged particles with mass attract. It is the square of the
electron mass in Planck units of mass while alpha is the
square of the electron charge in Planck units of charge. The
parallels with alpha are interesting but GCC links
gravity to charge and should be crucial in the more recent
investigations on the origin of mass.

 These 'constants' (which
as 'pure numbers' can be seen as 'stable' and
'prior' in relation to constants using units of
measurement)  may be conceived not
as 'true constants' but as modulators
of those constants. Their change would also modify
the Gravitational Constant. Interestingly, Álvarez
López also proposed that G could be
relativistically corrected dividing it
by 1 - v square/c square. If I'm
interpreting this correctly, this could mean that the
equivalence principle for two objects in relative motion with
each other would have to be modified. Professor
Álvarez López then placed the corrected G into
a Lagrange equation and arrived at Einstein's equation for
planetary motion. He then wrote that "this showed that
Einstein correction consisted exactly in transforming the
Constant of Gravitation into a Lorentzian invariant." Here
again we see Álvarez Lopez´s search for the
interplay between a 'prior' factor and a 'dependent'
factor.

In "Relativistic Dimensional Analysis"
there"s a claim that by modifying G (dividing it by 1- v2/c2
and placing this modified G in Lagrange equations) we arrive
to Einstein's equations for planetary motion. Álvarez
López also proposed that Eötvoss' experiments testing
the Equivalence Principle focused upon a relation that could
qualify as 'masses at rest'. He claimed that Eötvoss'
experiments say nothing in regards to the relativistic behavior
of masses in relative motion.

Professor Álvarez López told
me that Einstein"s General Relativity Theory was "a perfect
theory based upon two errors: 1. The equivalence between
inertial and gravitational mass, which he tacitly assumed and 2.
The constancy of the Gravitational Constant, which he also
tacitly assumed." Then he asserted that "the error about the
Equivalence Principle corrects the error about the Gravitational
Constant."

G0 (corrected Gravitational Constant) =
G/(1-v^2 ?/c?^2 ) Then, according to Álvarez López,
if G0 is utilized in Lagrange"s formula we obtain Einstein"s
formula for planetary motion, a formula that took Einstein 20
pages of tensorial calculus to obtain. Professor Álvarez
López also said that "this shows that it is easier to
arrive to the same results by starting from Electrodynamics and
moving to General Relativity because v(1-v^2 c^2 ) is obtained
from Special Relativity which pertains to Electrodynamics.
Einstein achieved the formulas but not the theory."

Thus, Professor Álvarez López
also discovered that Einstein was using two kinds of masses: The
relative mass of Special Relativity, where mass is a function of
velocity and the absolute mass of General Relativity, in which
the mass is constant and, therefore, independent of
velocity.

Regarding Length, if L = length at rest
L_0= Length during movement L = L_0 v(1-v^2/c^2 ) L<
L_0

Regarding Time (alternative equation) T=
T_0 v(1-v^2/c^2 )

Also, if G were constant, the formula for
the gravitational force would be equivalent to the formula of the
centrifugal force so that F = G (m M)/r^2 = m w^2 r

José Álvarez López"s
work delves into a distinction between universal and empirical
constants and goes into a relativistic dimensional method for
arriving (through a method and deduction) to a list of values
very closely corresponding to the atomic constants. Moreover,
by setting the simultaneity of Space or of Time when using
Lorentzian transformations, two sets of indeterminate or
ambivalent relativistic results for time and for length
result. In relation to this ambivalence in relativistic
formulas and in a personal conversation with Count L. de Broglie,
Professor Álvarez López was told that it was
important to distinguish between the "time of waves" and
the "time of corpuscles." In my layman's understanding
this seems to connect aspects of General Relativity with Quantum
Physics.

I think that, since Professor
Álvarez López admired Tolman's "Principle of
Similitude" and used his own (also quite interesting) "Principle
of Variational Homogeneity" and had the courage to delve into
some unclearly settled aspects of physics, his work was only
privately well-regarded by a few distinguished scientists. For
instance Professor Álvarez López was interested in
the role of the adimensional 'constant' alpha and of invariant
principles connected to the epistemological possibility of
carefully developing an a priori, Platonic, rational
method that would complement the empirical approach.

Also, Professor Álvarez López
claimed that by introducing in the practice of Dimensional
Analysis his "Principle of Dimensional Homogeneity" the
possibility of determining a priori the constants of
nature comes up. Due to this recognition of the possibility of an
aprioristic, deductive physics based on general principles, some
of Professor Álvarez López"s work seems adequate to
explore the role of an intelligent interiority in Physics,
typically limited to be a "hard science" mostly focused on
structured, stable, and objective Exteriority. Perhaps aspects
related to an intelligent, physical autopoiesis, to information
and, eventually, to the fundamental role of consciousness in the
physical universe would relate with this exploration.

In José Álvarez
López"s 1961 work titled Relativistic Dimensional Analysis
(p.58) we read:

"Tolman proved that with his Principle of
Similitude the aprioristic qualitative determination of all the
laws of Nature was possible. He also pointed out that this was
not the case for Newton"s law of gravitation; and the main
objection against Tolman"s Principle of Similitude was that with
its help the aprioristic determination of Newton"s law of
gravitation was impossible. Owing to this circumstance the
Principle of Tolman was rejected as a physical principle. It is
surprising to observe that nobody, at that time, considered the
other possibility: that the "constant" of the gravitational law
were not a real constant of Nature.

The equivalence between gravitational mass
and inertial mass, implicit in the Newton law of gravitation, has
always appeared as demonstrated by the existing isochronism of
penduli formed out of different materials. Later on, Eötvoss
confirmed the result of the isochronal experiments with the help
of the famous balance, demonstrating that the relationship
existing between masses of different substances in regard to the
gravitational and inertial actions was invariant at the poles and
at the equator. Taking into account that at the equator the
action of the gravitational force is somewhat opposed by the
centrifugal action due to the rotation of the Earth, this
experimental demonstration was considered sufficient proof for
the statement of a "Principle of Equivalence" of the
gravitational and inertial masses.

All these experiments and analyses have
been so amply discussed in the scientific literature that it is
surprising that nobody observed that the experiments of
Eötvoss –regardless of their extreme accuracy- were
performed under conditions we could qualify as static ones: i.e.
the relationship between the masses (terrestrial mass and the
mass in the balance) is referred to masses at rest. This
is the reason why Eötvoss" experiments say nothing in regard
to the relativistic behaviour of masses in relative motion (as,
for instance, the masses of a planet and the Sun). In face of
such facts -I have analyzed at full length in a previous paper
(24) – it is hardly dubious that a physicist will not
qualify the relativistic applying of such experiments as
"illegitimate extrapolations of experimental results."

We arrive at the conclusion that nobody has
demonstrated the "constant" of the gravitational law is really a
constant of Nature, and that in spite of this lack of
experimental evidence the constancy of such an entity is an
accepted fact of modern physics. Let us think of the
methodological mistake involved in the rejection of the Principle
of Similitude on the basis of its inability for determining a
"constant" that nobody has yet shown to be a constant of
Nature."

The English abstract of José
Álvarez López"s 1957 work El Concepto de Masa en
Relatividad General reads:

"In trying to transform trajectories of a
configuration space into geodetic lines of a Riemannian
space-time, the author has been led to the discovery of an
essential requirement

dm/dt=0

(where m represents coordinate mass) which
he calls "Principle of Identity." Its name suggests it to be a
generalization of the Newtonian "Principle of Equivalence" that
allows the discussion of dynamical conditions hitherto not taken
into account in the analysis of the quoted Newtonian
principle.

In section c the author shows –with
the help of the well-known "Einstein elevator" – that unless we
accept a principle of identity it will be possible to distinguish
between gravitational and inertial forces."

Professor Álvarez López was
one of the first scientists able to understand Albert Einstein"s
theories. While he was recognized by some important established
scientists, as a Latin American scientist working independently
against prevailing dogmas didn"t allow him to be recognized in
earnest. In Relativistic Dimensional Analysis, El Concepto de
Masa en Relatividad General, The Principle of Variational
Homogeneity and Self-Propulsion: A New Flying Technique (some of
which may be available through Borderland Sciences, Amazon and
Google Books) there are carefully detailed, cogent explanations
with step by step mathematical demonstrations that serious
scientists willing to learn plausible important corrections to
Einstein"s theories can find.

I"m aware that according to Erik P.
Verlinde, Phd, gravity can be thought of as a derived entropic
force linked to information and probability as the statistical
behavior of "degrees of freedom" which can be pictured as encoded
(minus one spatial dimension) within the concept of a
"holographic screen". Thus gravity would originate in a
difference on how much entropy and information is found in the
space between two masses in relation to its surroundings: More
entropy, more gravity and the more bits of information are
required to unscramble and to explain this entropy (because more
bits of information have been "lost") would be equivalent to a
greater "gravitational pull". Here inertia, gravity and space
would be emergent and information primary.

Whether –from another perspective-
this pull is also accompanied by a distortion of space-time and
to a concentration or dispersal of elementary "information
space-time units" this may also be plausible. To me this suggests
that the level of reality capable of modifying how much
information is required in order to obtain a practical
description is more fundamental. Could this be a higher symmetry
level which we can tap into through our awareness and perhaps our
very capacity to describe a certain space based on information
influences how we modify thermodynamically free information? Can
our consciousness connected with quantum non locality decrease
entropy? Hopefully physicists knowledgeable of these matters will
see if Professor Álvarez López"s work is still
useful to current discussions in physics.

For a stimulating read find Erik P.
Verlinde"s 'On the Origin of Gravity and the Laws of
Newton', at http://arxiv.org/abs/1001.0785

If Professor Álvarez López"s
works establish genuine discoveries, they may have many
implications. For instance, it may not be possible to adequately
define General Relativity in a Riemannian four dimensional space.
Perhaps his works agree with the possibility of finding practical
ways to increase the disparity between inertial and gravitational
masses and therefore of creating unique dynamic effects. Can
movement, the Coulomb Effect and vibrational information states
be intentionally imprinted/programmed and used to decrease
inertia and to tap into zero-point energy potentials in order to
manifest controlled self-propulsion? Might the General
Relativity formulas (modified by the inclusion of the
non-equivalence of the inertial and gravitational masses) allow
for an asymmetrical Coulomb Effect to become a self-propulsive
distortion of space-time?

Some important formulas:

Autor:

Giorgio Piacenza Cabrera