[mad aetherist (OP)]

I get the reasoning. Is there a list of experiments that proved it too?

The only experiments worth talking about that i know of are (1) Podkletnov's work & (2) dePalma's work.
Podkletnov claimed to have made a gravity beam using a spinning disc. He wrote articles & is also on youtube.
DePalma (now dead) claimed to have altered the g force acting on a ball by spinning the ball. I think there are articles on google.

[SEE ALSO THE LINK TO ANOTHER THREAD RE DEPALMA & RE PODKLETNOV]
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=75539.msg560753#msg560753

[Bored chemist]

Why bother to do the experiment?
Imagine I et a heavy  flywheel and connect it to a generator.
Then I put the gravity shield under one side of the wheel.
That side of the wheel is now lighter so it is pulled up by the weight of the other side of the wheel.
The wheel starts to turn and  it turns the generator.
I have a "free energy" machine- a perpetual motion generator.

But, since that's impossible, we know that there can not be a gravity shield.

Why waste money on the experiment, when you know it can't work?

[mad aetherist (OP)]

Why bother to do the experiment?
Imagine I get a heavy  flywheel and connect it to a generator.
Then I put the gravity shield under one side of the wheel.
That side of the wheel is now lighter so it is pulled up by the weight of the other side of the wheel.
The wheel starts to turn and  it turns the generator.
I have a "free energy" machine- a perpetual motion generator.
But, since that's impossible, we know that there can not be a gravity shield.
Why waste money on the experiment, when you know it can't work?

I think there is something gravitational going on with Podkletnov's spinning disc. He reports an effect on clock rate when a clock is placed near the axis. He reports having a gravity beam also that goes throo walls. For sure there is something gravitational going on. But gravity shields are a silly notion. Even Podkletnov knows that u cannot shield gravity. His live beam adds to it or negates it, just like dead mass can.

[Bored chemist]

He reports an effect...

Does anyone else?
Is the effect repeatable?

[alancalverd]

The rate of a clock will be altered by the proximity of any mass. The question is whether it changes if the mass spins. There is no obvious reason why it should.

But it does at least explain a phenomenon that has puzzled me for years. The instrument panel of a light aircraft contains all sorts of delicate machinery which seems to work for years and years despite being boiled, frozen, vibrated, bounced around, flown to silly altitudes, subject to loads of g in all directions, kicked as you get in the plane, sneezed and vomited over, and parked on the grass in all weathers. Except for the clock. Probably the simplest, most robust, most mature piece of kit on the panel, and they never work. Electric or mechanical, all certified airworthy, and I've never known one to actually tell the time. Now I understand why - there are at least three gyroscopes on the same panel!

[mad aetherist (OP)]

He reports an effect...

Does anyone else? Is the effect repeatable?

I dont know of any similar test or verification of a change in ticking or gravity etc.
I can imagine anything like this being hushed up, if by the government (for defense), & if by a science institute (to save embarrassment)(especially if it contradicts SR or GR)(which praps it dont).
I suggested an experiment to a scientist once, but was ignored. I suggested that clocks be placed at certain locations near a spinning wheel on one of  those buses that are driven by such inertia (inertial drive)(there were buses going past his university)(how hard would it be?).
Podkletnov used an ordinary modern precision wrist watch (how hard would it be?)

[mad aetherist (OP)]

The rate of a clock will be altered by the proximity of any mass. The question is whether it changes if the mass spins. There is no obvious reason why it should.

The only possible reason that i know of is my own theory. Except that Einsteinian frame dragging might explain the change in ticking (in an Einsteinian universe)(i dont believe in frame dragging)(whatever that is).

Podkletnov thort it had something to do with the low temperatures he used.
And or some sort of accidental or induced vibration (here i might be getting confused with something else).

My explanation involves aether, as usual. Podkletnov doesnt believe in aether, or at least he never mentions it.
If aether can be centrifuged (i think it can) then this must result in aether being sucked in at the Equator (using Earth as an example), in which case aether will be forced out at Earth's Poles.
The acceleration of the inflow will add to Earth's gravity at the Equator & would increase apparent g -- this inflow would be radial & would vary as per 1/R (whereas Earth's gravity varies as per 1/RR).
The acceleration of  the outflow might be zero, if the outflow takes the form of a beam (one beam at each Pole). In which case the outflow would not affect apparent g at the Poles.
This Earthly effect must be very weak, however it is possible that a hi-speed disc might have a strongish effect (on gravity & on ticking).

[yor_on]

Let's simplify

spinning is a acceleration
Earth accelerates too, by one gravity
do you find your wristwatch to change their 'ticks'?

And of course, can you prove it?

[alancalverd]

Podkletnov used an ordinary modern precision wrist watch (how hard would it be?)

A "modern precision wrist watch" keeps good time because it is worn on your wrist. The quartz oscillator is slightly temperature-sensitive and is calibrated for about 30 deg C. Vibration and even air pressure can alter the crystal frequency. If you compare it with a cesium frequency standard, it drifts all over the place and is therefore not a "measure"  but a reasonably adequate "indicator" of  time. Interestingly, however, the crystal frequency is independent of g.

[mad aetherist (OP)]

Podkletnov used an ordinary modern precision wrist watch (how hard would it be?)

A "modern precision wrist watch" keeps good time because it is worn on your wrist. The quartz oscillator is slightly temperature-sensitive and is calibrated for about 30 deg C. Vibration and even air pressure can alter the crystal frequency. If you compare it with a cesium frequency standard, it drifts all over the place and is therefore not a "measure"  but a reasonably adequate "indicator" of  time. Interestingly, however, the crystal frequency is independent of g.

Interesting. Yes i think Podkletnov used a quartz watch. Praps not best. Especially with all that vibration going on. Plus some super low temps a few inches away. I suppose that u could have pairs of watches. Say spinning disc is horizontal -- u could have 1 pair above the axis, 1 pair below the axis, a few pairs around near the equator (ie disc rim), & a few pairs well away near the walls.

This would be an easy skool project. If i ever did a science experiment then this would be it. Centrifuging of aether is my pet theory.
I have seen only one mention of such a theory on google. U might find a couple of similar sounding mentions on google but u will find that these talk of aether being spat out around the equator (a naive notion) , & being sucked in near the poles, the exact opposite of my theory -- & my theory is the only one that has a chance of being correct, altho the aforementioned clock experiment would show a result either way.

U would of course take readings during the course of 1 day with the disc stationary. Then 1 days worth of readings with the disc spinning. Hopefully both days being very similar weatherwise.

Somebody should do it. U could of course just bring a spinning disc up close to an atomic clock & quickly see if any change when close then away then close etc.  Needing another clock in the adjacent room i guess.

Handy hints. The effect on ticking above the disc will be different to below. Here i am not referring to the different gravitational potential -- i am talking about an aetheric reason (although gravitational potential is aetheric)(but a different sort of aetheric)(i can explain).
Clocks near the rim of the disc will suffer almost zero change.
Superlow temps not needed.
Vibration not needed.

Proof of modifying gravity in this way would be a first & would be quickly rewarded with a Nobel, plus some more Nobels down the track.

U might get lots of complaints & nuisance calls from Podkletnov, just ignore him, i thort of all of this before i knew of Podkletnov, & anyhow he hasnt a clue about the cause, he blames superlow temps & vibration or something.

The cause is due to a beam of aether going away axially. Podkletnov knows about the beam(s) (two beams, one at each pole). The speed of the aether in the beam must affect ticking. However contrary to what Podkletnov says the beam does not affect gravity (g). However swinging the beam across a gravimeter will affect the meter (& gravity), but only while swinging across, a fixed beam will not affect a gravimeter (i can explain better).

Hmmm, ok a fixed beam wont affect gravity, but it will affect apparent gravity, because by affecting the "ticking" of the gravimeter the fixed beam must affect the g reading (but this will be an apparent change) not a real change. But swinging the beam across the gravimeter must result in a  real change in g, albeit briefly.

[mad aetherist (OP)]

Podkletnov used an ordinary modern precision wrist watch (how hard would it be?)

A "modern precision wrist watch" keeps good time because it is worn on your wrist. The quartz oscillator is slightly temperature-sensitive and is calibrated for about 30 deg C. Vibration and even air pressure can alter the crystal frequency. If you compare it with a cesium frequency standard, it drifts all over the place and is therefore not a "measure"  but a reasonably adequate "indicator" of  time. Interestingly, however, the crystal frequency is independent of g.

Yes ok. But a quartz watch could nonetheless be used ok for a spinning-disc gravity experiment. In the experiment the g in the beam above the axis doesnt change directly, but the ticking does change, & it is the effect on ticking that we are looking for.

The change in the ticking results in an indirect apparent change in g in the beam, & if u are correct then the watch would not be affected by that change, however this would be a bonus, because if the watch were affected by g then it might negate the change in ticking that we are looking for (see?).
Thusly Podkletnov's use of a quartz watch is not a guarantee of  getting a null result first time every time. A quartz watch will do the trick (except for all of the other inherent sources of possible systematic error that u mentioned).

[alancalverd]

Numbers, please.

[mad aetherist (OP)]

Numbers, please.

If u watch all of Podkletnov's youtube stuff & articles u will see him give some numbers (for ticking dilation etc).

[Bored chemist]

If u watch all of Podkletnov's youtube stuff & articles u will see him give some numbers (for ticking dilation etc).

It's your job to provide the numbers, not our so watch YT.

[Bored chemist]

This would be an easy skool project. If i ever did a science experiment then this would be it. Centrifuging of aether is my pet theory.

Do it.
YOu will either learn and move on, or get a Nobel prize.

[mad aetherist (OP)]

This would be an easy skool project. If i ever did a science experiment then this would be it. Centrifuging of aether is my pet theory.

Do it. YOu will either learn and move on, or get a Nobel prize.

I have worked in a laboratory. But this project needs lots of effort, even tho easy.
If the centrifuging of aether is real then it would explain the rings of Saturn. The equatorial inflow & circulation of aether would over time result in orbiting matter migrating to Saturn's equator, giving rings.
And, it would explain why the planets are in a sort of solar equatorial plane.

[Bored chemist]

OK, so you can't do school level science experiments, and you don't understand why most of the planets are in the same plane.

Why should we take you seriously?

[mad aetherist (OP)]

OK, so you can't do school level science experiments, and you don't understand why most of the planets are in the same plane. Why should we take you seriously?

Why are most planets in the same plane?

[alancalverd]

But this project needs lots of effort, even tho easy.

Apparently not. All you need is a wristwatch and a spinning disc. You have the numbers.

[mad aetherist (OP)]

OK, so you can't do school level science experiments, and you don't understand why most of the planets are in the same plane. Why should we take you seriously?

I was thinking College level science moreso than senior skool or junior skool. I think i could do the spinning disc experiment. The axis of the disc should best be parallel to earth's spin-axis -- & the clock on the north side of the disc will tick more slowly than the clock on the south side -- then swap the clocks around as a double check.  What are the most accurate wristwatches?