Please excuse any typos.
Modern Science is More Like A Religion: The Equivalence Principle is Nonsense
Mainstream science and history tend to be more mythology than fact. The mathematically driven astronomical sciences are touted as being foundational to modern technology and yet this is nothing but a huge lie. Einstein's work is nothing but meaningless and groundless fantasy. Not only was the man a plagiarist who copied and pasted the work of other ad hoc apologists (from other nations), he was a true daydream believer, "homecoming queen" kind of guy. Einstein's work is derived from the work of people like Poincare, Lorentz, Maxwell and many others. Many of these men were also very imaginative day dream believers and much of what is presented to us as serious science is nothing but the product of the fantastic imaginings of fevered minds.
Modern Science is A Religion.
We are supposed to believe the Earth is a Spaceship moving through "Outer Space".
Despite University and media promoted hype, there is not one shred of demonstrable evidence to support the claim that the Earth is anything but the unmoving center of the Universe.
Astronomy is a superstitious belief system and always has been one.
Einstein is one of the mythical gods of the modern religion of Scientism. The insane ramblings of minds like these are sold to the public as Laws of the Universe, Unfounded and fantastic ad hoc ideas do not even deserve the label "theory" let alone "Law".
The Equivalence Principle is Nonsense
"The equivalence principle was properly introduced by Albert Einstein in 1907, when he observed that the acceleration of bodies towards the center of the Earth at a rate of 1g (g = 9.81 m/s2 being a standard reference of gravitational acceleration at the Earth's surface) is equivalent to the acceleration of an inertially moving body that would be observed on a rocket in free space being accelerated at a rate of 1g. Einstein stated it thus:"
Einstein observed no such thing. His was a "thought experiment" or what most people would call a daydream or fantasy. All Einstein could observe was "the acceleration of bodies towards the center of the Earth at a rate of 1g." And this is all anyone could ever observe, despite historical myth to the contrary. The Big "G" or Universal Gravitational constant is a big lie. All anyone could ever demonstrate is the accelerated rate of the falling apple here on Earth, all else is nothing but fantasy.
The wikipedia entry exemplifies everything that is wrong with modern cosmology and our world. Einstein's work is all predicated on ad hoc explanations with no basis in reality. Every time the mainstream Sun centered model of the Universe was shown to be fallacious, illogical reasoning became cosmic revelation that got churned into "Natural Law". Nature does not pass laws humans do. Laws define social order and attempt to define human behavior. The use of the word 'law" is a clue we are not dealing with demonstrable natural principle, but instead propaganda.
Today's Black Hole filled, Big Bang cosmology is a far cry from Sir Isaac Newton's Sun centered Universe of Fixed Stars. Newton and company would think modern science insane. Einstein's thought experiment is as much a fantasy as Newton's. Thought experiments based on demonstrable principle should never be confused with thought experiments based on fantasy. Einstein's work is simply brainteasing fantasy and it is very flawed despite all the complex looking mathematical gibberish. Mathematical babel is proof of nothing. "This sentence is a lie." is as meaningful as Einstein's mathematical equations. Context matters. Einstein's work is one huge unverifiable and insane claim.
A Compass Proves Einstein Wrong
We are supposed to believe that standing on the Earth's surface is the same as being in a magical windowless genie pulled elevator. This man is considered a genius. He is a joke. His General Relativity thought experiment is nonsense. It cannot be engineered nor can it be demonstrated. It is not science, it is bad and illogical metaphysics. Einstein's work is nothing but a brainteaser. He claims that no experiment can be done to distinguish being motionless on the Earth's surface or being in a genie pulled windowless elevator. Yet a compass proves Einstein wrong. There would be no magnetic fields in Einstein's imagined starless and planet less "space". On Earth we can navigate the globe with a compass.
Space & Time Are Ideas With No Physical Properties
Not only does a compass prove Einstein wrong, so do many other things. The wikipedia entry itself engages in the fine art of political spin and attempts to apologize away all the obvious logical flaws. The Equivalence Principle is an example of modern religious catechism. Do you really believe anyone can engineer a magical rocket that not only needs no fuel, but that can perfectly accelerate in the manner needed to maintain Einstein's fantastic fictional flight of fancy?
Einstein's Magically Reasoned "Theory Saving" Caveat: "As long as tidal effects can be neglected".
"Tidal effects are what tells a freely falling observer that he is in an inhomogeneous gravitational field, and thus definitely not in gravity-free space. Thus, a more precise formulation of the equivalence principle states that in any freely falling reference frame, the laws of physics are the same as in special relativity, as long as tidal effects can be neglected."
"This extreme example shows clearly: the elevator and the spheres do not fall in parallel. Instead, they fall towards one and the same point, the earth's centre of gravity. And while an observer inside the elevator does not see the common downward component of the fall, he or she will notice that the two spheres move slightly closer together."
Einstein Ignores The Fact That Gravity Pulls An Object Towards The Center Of The Earth. Was Einstein a "Flat Earther"?
An Incomplete "Theory" Based on Daydream Belief
"The equivalence between gravitational and inertial effects does not constitute a complete theory of gravity. When it comes to explaining gravity near our own location on the Earth's surface, noting that our reference frame is not in free fall, so that fictitious forces are to be expected, provides a suitable explanation. But a freely falling reference frame on one side of the Earth cannot explain why the people on the opposite side of the Earth experience a gravitational pull in the opposite direction.
A more basic manifestation of the same effect involves two bodies that are falling side by side towards the Earth. In a reference frame that is in free fall alongside these bodies, they appear to hover weightlessly – but not exactly so. These bodies are not falling in precisely the same direction, but towards a single point in space: namely, the Earth's center of gravity. Consequently, there is a component of each body's motion towards the other (see the figure). In a small environment such as a freely falling lift, this relative acceleration is minuscule, while for skydivers on opposite sides of the Earth, the effect is large. Such differences in force are also responsible for the tides in the Earth's oceans, so the term "tidal effect" is used for this phenomenon.
The equivalence between inertia and gravity cannot explain tidal effects – it cannot explain variations in the gravitational field. For that, a theory is needed which describes the way that matter (such as the large mass of the Earth) affects the inertial environment around it."
Who, What, Where, Why, When and How Matter
A compass proves this idea wrong and yet nobody seems to care. There would be no magnetic field present in Einstein's imagined area of the Universe where he imagines there to be no other planets nor stars. Einstein completely ignores things like the conservation of energy, and demonstrable physics. Engineering new machines is how one proves one's theories. All Einstein needed was a good public relations agency. Einstein is the idol of the uncritically thinking mind.
Who? Einstein and the imagined genie who does not need to eat or sleep.
What? A Thought Experiment. An exercise of the imagination. A fantasy. A cartoon thought balloon.
Where? An imagined area of imagined "Outer Space" far removed from the gravitational effects of any other body. A fantasy. A cartoon thought balloon.
Why? To patch the illogical heliocentric based model of the Universe which cannot be proven at all.
How: MAGIC! Einstein does not know and neither does anyone else.
Modern science is a glass house of shattering cards that is built on huge brown foundation that smells funny. Thought experiment fantasy back by illogical premised mathematical equation acts like magical spells that literally bind and blind the human imaginations to a system of nonsense and insanity.
The Earth is not a spaceship and gravity is undefined. Einstein nor Newton nor anyone else bothers to really explain gravity. They just refer to the effect we can demonstrate and then (illogically) apply it to the phenomena we can witness in the sky above our heads. Despite Newton's mad ramblings, the Moon is not an apple. One will always fall to the Earth and one never will.
Circular reasoning and mathematical babel, support the fantastic ideas of orbits. and this is another reason for Einstein's attempt to patch the works. He had to make unmoving seem like moving and curved orbits straight. In order for us to accept the Universe of orbiting planets, we must ignore demonstrable physical principle like centrifugal force. A stone flung from a sling shows us the very real and demonstrable fallacy with Newton's theories about orbits. A hand mixer or blender in any kitchen is a very real experiment that shows what happens when things spin. There is no evidence the Earth spins nor orbits the Sun. All observations, real experiment and human senses tell us the Earth is motionless. Experiments that claim otherwise are massaged to provide the result desired.
The interferometer experiments that claim to show the Earth spins on its axis are flawed, and ignore any other explanation in favor of a rigid adherence to one and only one interpretation. (see below for more)
Always Question All Assumptions
we [...] assume the complete physical equivalence of a gravitational field and a corresponding acceleration of the reference system.
— Einstein, 1907
"That is, being on the surface of the Earth is equivalent to being inside a spaceship (far from any sources of gravity) that is being accelerated by its engines. The direction or vector of acceleration equivalence on the surface of the earth is "up" or directly opposite the center of the planet while the vector of acceleration in a spaceship is directly opposite from the mass ejected by its thrusters. From this principle, Einstein deduced that free-fall is inertial motion. Objects in free-fall do not experience being accelerated downward (e.g. toward the earth or other massive body) but rather weightlessness and no acceleration. In an inertial frame of reference bodies (and photons, or light) obey Newton's first law, moving at constant velocity in straight lines. Analogously, in a curved spacetime the world line of an inertial particle or pulse of light is as straight as possible (in space and time). Such a world line is called a geodesic and from the point of view of the inertial frame is a straight line. This is why an accelerometer in free-fall doesn't register any acceleration; there isn't any.
As an example: an inertial body moving along a geodesic through space can be trapped into an orbit around a large gravitational mass without ever experiencing acceleration. This is possible because spacetime is radically curved in close vicinity to a large gravitational mass. In such a situation the geodesic lines bend inward around the center of the mass and a free-floating (weightless) inertial body will simply follow those curved geodesics into an elliptical orbit. An accelerometer on-board would never record any acceleration.
By contrast, in Newtonian mechanics, gravity is assumed to be a force. This force draws objects having mass towards the center of any massive body. At the Earth's surface, the force of gravity is counteracted by the mechanical (physical) resistance of the Earth's surface. So in Newtonian physics, a person at rest on the surface of a (non-rotating) massive object is in an inertial frame of reference. These considerations suggest the following corollary to the equivalence principle, which Einstein formulated precisely in 1911:
Whenever an observer detects the local presence of a force that acts on all objects in direct proportion to the inertial mass of each object, that observer is in an accelerated frame of reference.
Einstein also referred to two reference frames, K and K'. K is a uniform gravitational field, whereas K' has no gravitational field but is uniformly accelerated such that objects in the two frames experience identical forces:
We arrive at a very satisfactory interpretation of this law of experience, if we assume that the systems K and K' are physically exactly equivalent, that is, if we assume that we may just as well regard the system K as being in a space free from gravitational fields, if we then regard K as uniformly accelerated. This assumption of exact physical equivalence makes it impossible for us to speak of the absolute acceleration of the system of reference, just as the usual theory of relativity forbids us to talk of the absolute velocity of a system; and it makes the equal falling of all bodies in a gravitational field seem a matter of course.
— Einstein, 1911
This observation was the start of a process that culminated in general relativity. Einstein suggested that it should be elevated to the status of a general principle, which he called the "principle of equivalence" when constructing his theory of relativity:
As long as we restrict ourselves to purely mechanical processes in the realm where Newton's mechanics holds sway, we are certain of the equivalence of the systems K and K'. But this view of ours will not have any deeper significance unless the systems K and K' are equivalent with respect to all physical processes, that is, unless the laws of nature with respect to K are in entire agreement with those with respect to K'. By assuming this to be so, we arrive at a principle which, if it is really true, has great heuristic importance. For by theoretical consideration of processes which take place relatively to a system of reference with uniform acceleration, we obtain information as to the career of processes in a homogeneous gravitational field.
— Einstein, 1911"
"Another clarification needed is that the equivalence principle assumes a constant acceleration of 1g without considering the mechanics of generating 1g. If we do consider the mechanics of it, then we must assume the aforementioned windowless room has a fixed mass. Accelerating it at 1g means there is a constant force being applied, which = m*g where m is the mass of the windowless room along with its contents (including the observer). Now, if the observer jumps inside the room, an object lying freely on the floor will decrease in weight momentarily because the acceleration is going to decrease momentarily due to the observer pushing back against the floor in order to jump. The object will then gain weight while the observer is in the air and the resulting decreased mass of the windowless room allows greater acceleration; it will lose weight again when the observer lands and pushes once more against the floor; and it will finally return to its initial weight afterwards. To make all these effects equal those we would measure on a planet producing 1g, the windowless room must be assumed to have the same mass as that planet. Additionally, the windowless room must not cause its own gravity, otherwise the scenario changes even further. These are technicalities, clearly, but practical ones if we wish the experiment to demonstrate more or less precisely the equivalence of 1g gravity and 1g acceleration."
The Art of Religious Apologetics is Alive & Well
As you can read that is one example of the kinds of problems we can encounter when we begin to inspect the claims made by the mainstream University trained mind.
No Real Evidence the Earth Spins or Moves at All
First of all you will notice that the formula Michelson used does not make sense in this context, does it? The individuals lengths of the light path are ignored and the area of the set up is used as a value. This is another in a long line of examples where mathematical equation is used like a sleight of hand magic trick to confuse the uncritical mind. The total area of the light path is not relevant to the experiment, is it? What matters would be the difference in time the one light path had relative to the other. That is what is supposed to produce the resulting fringe shift after all. It seems pretty obvious that all one has to do is design the experiment so the area is of the correct value to yield the desired result. (*never mind the speed of light is another myth and artifact of a solar cult) All of the other values are also ASSUMED. These values are artifacts of the cult. These mathematical numbers are like the Ten Commandments or catechisms of religious faith. One is not allowed to question these underlying assumptions anymore than one is supposed to question religious authority. Science is not supposed to be fantastic assumption backed by the incorrect use of mathematical equation anymore so than poetry is supposed to be composed of meaningless gibberish.
The Earth has an active magnetic field which Michelson ignores. He also ignored the fact that his experimental set up has no real control group. This simply is not a real experiment. It is a circularly reasoned exercise with a predetermined result in mind. This is religious propaganda and nothing more.
“The Michelson–Gale–Pearson experiment (1925) is a modified version of the Michelson–Morley experiment and the Sagnac-Interferometer. It measured the Sagnac effect due to Earth's rotation, and thus tests the theories of special relativity and luminiferous ether along the rotating frame of Earth.
The aim, as it was first proposed by Albert A. Michelson in 1904 and then executed in 1925, was to find out whether the rotation of the Earth has an effect on the propagation of light in the vicinity of the Earth. The Michelson-Gale experiment was a very large ring interferometer, (a perimeter of 1.9 kilometer), large enough to detect the angular velocity of the Earth. Like the original Michelson-Morley experiment, the Michelson-Gale-Pearson version compared the light from a single source (carbon arc) after travelling in two directions. The major change was to replace the two "arms" of the original MM version with two rectangles, one much larger than the other. Light was sent into the rectangles, reflecting off mirrors at the corners, and returned to the starting point. Light exiting the two rectangles was compared on a screen just as the light returning from the two arms would be in a standard MM experiment. The expected fringe shift in accordance with the stationary aether and special relativity was given by Michelson as:
Δ\Delta is the displacement in fringes,
A the area in square kilometers,
ϕ\phi the latitude (41° 46'),
c the speed of light,
ω\omega the angular velocity of Earth,
λ\lambda the effective wavelength used. In other words, this experiment was aimed to detect the Sagnac effect due to Earth's rotation.”
The area of the experimental setup is incorrectly and fallaciously used to derive the desired result. This is wrong and shows us that this experiment proves absolutely nothing at all. This experiment is nothing but pure nonsense.
The Flawed Experiment:
As you can see the experiment (below) should have resulted in a null result. The light paths are all equal in length and this would mean that the differences would cancel out, would it not? If we assume the Earth is rotating (an unfounded assumption based on illogical metaphysical choice) would we not expect that the paths of both beams would be the same as the lengths are exactly the same.
The experiential set up is a rectangle with opposing sides of equal lengths.
Circular Reasoned Fallacies Are Not Real Science
The path ADEF and AFED are the ones that were used to produce the "measurement". As we can see for ourselves if we assume a rotational motion the path lengths cancel out so we'd expect a null result. Yet as we know, Michelson had to massage the formula in an illogical manner in order to get the result he was looking for. This is propaganda and not a real reprodudicble experiment. Imperfections in the glass of the mirrors themselves would be the obvious and more logical cause of any result. The entire experiment is incapable of proving anything. There is no reason to believe the Earth moves and all the evidence that is put forth falls apart upon inspection. NASA is a film studio and the space programs of the world are propaganda efforts. See the article index or read more of this blog if you have any questions as to why I would make such a statement.
Another problem with this "experiment" is that the mirrors would be rotating out of the way. Yet everyone seems to consider this some kind of linear motion. None of it need make any sense as this is all fantasy nonsense. The path the light rays take are supposed to be unaffected by the motions of the emitter or receiver. The light path would not logically be expected to rotate with the so-called "frame of reference".
This does not seem like a reliable experiment at all.
Circular Reasoning Is Logically Fallacious
Astronomy was never a science. It was always a star gazing cult. Astronomers were in the business of projecting fanatic ideas onto the heavens and still do so today. Irrational ideas back with illogical mathematical equation are sold as "Laws" to the mass public. NASA photographic cartoons are the only evidence that most think real. The fact is NASA is a Hollywood propaganda studio and little else.
“The outcome of the experiment was that the angular velocity of the Earth as measured by astronomy was confirmed to within measuring accuracy. The ring interferometer of the Michelson-Gale experiment was not calibrated by comparison with an outside reference (which was not possible, because the setup was fixed to the Earth). From its design it could be deduced where the central interference fringe ought to be if there would be zero shift. The measured shift was 230 parts in 1000, with an accuracy of 5 parts in 1000. The predicted shift was 237 parts in 1000. According to Michelson/Gale, the experiment is compatible with both the idea of a stationary ether and special relativity."
"As it was already pointed out by Michelson in 1904, a positive result in such experiments contradicts the hypothesis of complete aether drag. On the other hand, the stationary ether concept is in agreement with this result, yet it contradicts (with the exception of Lorentz's ether) the Michelson-Morley experiment. Thus special relativity is the only theory which explains both experiments. The experiment is consistent with relativity for the same reason as all other Sagnac type experiments (see Sagnac effect). That is, rotation is absolute in special relativity, because there is no inertial frame of reference in which the whole device is at rest during the complete process of rotation, thus the light paths of the two rays are different in all of those frames, consequently a positive result must occur. It's also possible to define rotating frames in special relativity (Born coordinates), yet in those frames the speed of light is not constant in extended areas any more, thus also in this view a positive result must occur. Today, Sagnac type effects due to Earth's rotation are routinely incorporated into GPS."
The mainstream confuses light based interferometer experiment with electron "gun" (cathode ray) based ones. The former are fallacious and the latter are demonstrable science.
Astronomy was never a science. It was always mysticism.
c. 1200, "astronomy, astrology, scientific or occult study of heavenly bodies," from Old French astrenomie "astronomy, astrology," from Latin astronomia, from Greek astronomia, abstract noun from astronomos, literally "star-regulating," from astron "star" (see star (n.)) + nomos "arranging, regulating; rule, law" from PIE root *nem- "to divide, distribute, allot" (see nemesis). Perhaps originally with reference to mapping the constellations or movements of planets.
Þer wes moni god clarc to lokien in þan leofte, to lokien i þan steorren nehʒe and feorren. þe craft is ihate Astronomie. [Layamon, "The Brut," c. 1200]
In English, it is earlier than astrology and originally included the senses now distributed over both words; the gradual differentiation happened 16c.-17c. In Latin and later Greek, astronomia tended to be more scientific than astrologia.
"A little reflection will show that the law of the equality of the inertial and gravitational mass is equivalent to the assertion that the acceleration imparted to a body by a gravitational field is independent of the nature of the body. For Newton's equation of motion in a gravitational field, written out in full, it is:
(Inertial mass) (Acceleration) (Intensity of the gravitational field) (Gravitational mass).
It is only when there is numerical equality between the inertial and gravitational mass that the acceleration is independent of the nature of the body."
"In the theory of general relativity, the equivalence principle is any of several related concepts dealing with the equivalence of gravitational and inertial mass, and to Albert Einstein's observation that the gravitational "force" as experienced locally while standing on a massive body (such as the Earth) is the same as the pseudo-force experienced by an observer in a non-inertial (accelerated) frame of reference."
"That is, being on the surface of the Earth is equivalent to being inside a spaceship (far from any sources of gravity) that is being accelerated by its engines. The direction or vector of acceleration equivalence on the surface of the earth is "up" or directly opposite the center of the planet while the vector of acceleration in a spaceship is directly opposite from the mass ejected by its thrusters. From this principle, Einstein deduced that free-fall is inertial motion. Objects in free-fall do not experience being accelerated downward (e.g. toward the earth or other massive body) but rather weightlessness and no acceleration. In an inertial frame of reference bodies (and photons, or light) obey Newton's first law, moving at constant velocity in straight lines. Analogously, in a curved spacetime the world line of an inertial particle or pulse of light is as straight as possible (in space and time). Such a world line is called a geodesic and from the point of view of the inertial frame is a straight line. This is why an accelerometer in free-fall doesn't register any acceleration; there isn't any."
When something or someone is at rest on the surface the Earth, that body is motionless. The body is still experiencing the Natural phenomena we call "gravity". Natural and artificial structures have to be able to support their own weight, which is the physical measure of gravity's power. Gravity would seem to be some kind of unidirectional environmental vibration that pushes physical bodies towards the center of the Earth. The environmental effect we call Gravity imparts velocity to a body with a measurable constant rate, We could model gravity as being a wave of the Aether and this wave pushes things like apples and stones towards the center of the world.
Gravity might be better thought of as an environmental vibration with a frequency. The accelerometers are made of substances that can be used to receive radio waves, so we can see that these naturally occurring substances might be resonating with environmental radiation. This is no flight of fantasy, the idea that gravity is some kind of environmental wave is based on demonstrable natural principles. The environment imparts a constant rate of motion to a physical body and as the body moves towards Earth's center, the environment proportionally imparts less and less velocity per measure of time. This is why an object rate of speed increases at a predictable rate.
The faster the objects falls the less speed the environment imparts to the object in exact (equal and opposite) proportion.
The environment imparts the most force per second of time during the initial drop. It imparts less force per second, as the object continues to fall. A falling object would then be moving away from the unidirectional vibration with increasing velocity that proportionally diminishes the effect.
image source: How Fast? and How Far? - The Physics Classroom
Can we use springs to measure gravitational acceleration? Would a spring at rest on your desk measure anything?
Gravity Is a Radio Wave
Crystal radio sets and computer transistor circuits use quartz and other naturally occurring substances.
"Conceptually, an accelerometer behaves as a damped mass on a spring. When the accelerometer experiences an acceleration, the mass is displaced to the point that the spring is able to accelerate the mass at the same rate as the casing. The displacement is then measured to give the acceleration.
"An accelerometer is a device that measures proper acceleration; proper acceleration is not the same as coordinate acceleration (rate of change of velocity). For example, an accelerometer at rest on the surface of the Earth will measure an acceleration due to Earth's gravity, straight upwards (by definition) of g ≈ 9.81 m/s2. By contrast, accelerometers in free fall (falling toward the center of the Earth at a rate of about 9.81 m/s2) will measure zero.
Accelerometers have multiple applications in industry and science. Highly sensitive accelerometers are components of inertial navigation systems for aircraft and missiles. Accelerometers are used to detect and monitor vibration in rotating machinery. Accelerometers are used in tablet computers and digital cameras so that images on screens are always displayed upright. Accelerometers are used in drones for flight stabilisation. Coordinated accelerometers can be used to measure differences in proper acceleration, particularly gravity, over their separation in space; i.e., gradient of the gravitational field. This gravity gradiometry is useful because absolute gravity is a weak effect and depends on local density of the Earth which is quite variable.
An accelerometer at rest relative to the Earth's surface will indicate approximately 1 g upwards, because any point on the Earth's surface is accelerating upwards relative to the local inertial frame (the frame of a freely falling object near the surface). To obtain the acceleration due to motion with respect to the Earth, this "gravity offset" must be subtracted and corrections made for effects caused by the Earth's rotation relative to the inertial frame.
The reason for the appearance of a gravitational offset is Einstein's equivalence principle, which states that the effects of gravity on an object are indistinguishable from acceleration. When held fixed in a gravitational field by, for example, applying a ground reaction force or an equivalent upward thrust, the reference frame for an accelerometer (its own casing) accelerates upwards with respect to a free-falling reference frame. The effects of this acceleration are indistinguishable from any other acceleration experienced by the instrument, so that an accelerometer cannot detect the difference between sitting in a rocket on the launch pad, and being in the same rocket in deep space while it uses its engines to accelerate at 1 g. For similar reasons, an accelerometer will read zero during any type of free fall. This includes use in a coasting spaceship in deep space far from any mass, a spaceship orbiting the Earth, an airplane in a parabolic "zero-g" arc, or any free-fall in vacuum. Another example is free-fall at a sufficiently high altitude that atmospheric effects can be neglected."
"Acceleration is quantified in the SI unit metres per second per second (m/s2), in the cgs unit gal (Gal), or popularly in terms of standard gravity (g).
"For the practical purpose of finding the acceleration of objects with respect to the Earth, such as for use in an inertial navigation system, a knowledge of local gravity is required. This can be obtained either by calibrating the device at rest, or from a known model of gravity at the approximate current position."
"Conceptually, an accelerometer behaves as a damped mass on a spring. When the accelerometer experiences an acceleration, the mass is displaced to the point that the spring is able to accelerate the mass at the same rate as the casing. The displacement is then measured to give the acceleration.
In commercial devices, piezoelectric, piezoresistive and capacitive components are commonly used to convert the mechanical motion into an electrical signal. Piezoelectric accelerometers rely on piezoceramics (e.g. lead zirconate titanate) or single crystals (e.g. quartz, tourmaline). They are unmatched in terms of their upper frequency range, low packaged weight and high temperature range. Piezoresistive accelerometers are preferred in high shock applications. Capacitive accelerometers typically use a silicon micro-machined sensing element. Their performance is superior in the low frequency range and they can be operated in servo mode to achieve high stability and linearity.
Modern accelerometers are often small micro electro-mechanical systems (MEMS), and are indeed the simplest MEMS devices possible, consisting of little more than a cantilever beam with a proof mass (also known as seismic mass). Damping results from the residual gas sealed in the device. As long as the Q-factor is not too low, damping does not result in a lower sensitivity.
Under the influence of external accelerations the proof mass deflects from its neutral position. This deflection is measured in an analog or digital manner. Most commonly, the capacitance between a set of fixed beams and a set of beams attached to the proof mass is measured. This method is simple, reliable, and inexpensive. Integrating piezoresistors in the springs to detect spring deformation, and thus deflection, is a good alternative, although a few more process steps are needed during the fabrication sequence. For very high sensitivities quantum tunneling is also used; this requires a dedicated process making it very expensive. Optical measurement has been demonstrated on laboratory scale.
Another, far less common, type of MEMS-based accelerometer contains a small heater at the bottom of a very small dome, which heats the air inside the dome to cause it to rise. A thermocouple on the dome determines where the heated air reaches the dome and the deflection off the center is a measure of the acceleration applied to the sensor.
Most micromechanical accelerometers operate in-plane, that is, they are designed to be sensitive only to a direction in the plane of the die. By integrating two devices perpendicularly on a single die a two-axis accelerometer can be made. By adding another out-of-plane device three axes can be measured. Such a combination may have much lower misalignment error than three discrete models combined after packaging.
Micromechanical accelerometers are available in a wide variety of measuring ranges, reaching up to thousands of g's. The designer must make a compromise between sensitivity and the maximum acceleration that can be measured."
"The earliest development of the resistance-bridge-type accel- erometer, which was ultimately commercialized, is credited to McCollum and Peters.13,17 It weighed about a pound and was 3/4 ¥ 1-7/8 ¥ 8-1/2 in. in size. It consisted of an E-shaped frame con- taining 20 to 55 carbon rings in a tension-compression Wheatstone half-bridge between the top and center section of the frame. Figure 1 illustrates this device. By 1923 it had found application in bridges, dynamometers, and aircraft. By 1925 its associated technology had moved to Germany and in 1927 it was commercialized in the U.S. through Southwark, later Baldwin-Southwark, and now BLH Electronics. Its reported resonant frequency was less than 2000 Hz. By 1936, Southwark Bulletin 132 advertised13 a two-axis accelerometer model with “adjustable cork damping” in ranges to 100 g. Reported applications were: “recording acceleration of an airplane catapult, passenger elevators, aircraft shock absorbers and to record vibrations of steam turbines, underground pipes and forces of explosions . . .” In addition to eight overseas users, 110 U.S. users were identified who apparently were willing to pay the early 1930’s price of $420!
Additional insight into the early uses of accelerometers can be acquired from F. G. Tatnall’s book Tatnall on Testing printed by the University of Pennsylvania Press (1966). Tatnall’s professional career began with his graduation in 1920 from the University of Pennsylvania and spanned in excess of 40 years of experimental mechanics development and testing. He reflects in his book that, during the depression years in the United States, all advancement of testing seemed to reside at the Washington Navy Yard and the Naval Aircraft Yard at Philadelphia. During this period, drop tests of airplanes are described which required “electric pressure gages for the oleo gear, together with accelerometers and deflection trans- ducers mostly made with inductor telemeters and slide wires.”
"The problem with all of the metal strain gage accelerometers was that they provided full scale signal outputs of approximately 30 mV. Thus, depending on the application, signal to noise ratios could be a problem. Even to achieve these signal levels, seismic systems using high compliance (low stiffness) flexures were re- quired. These flexures resulted in low resonant frequencies and mechanically fragile accelerometers. To increase their frequency response, and at the same time decrease their fragility, accelerom- eters were often fluid damped to 0.707 of critical. This damping would increase their useable frequency response by a factor of three while decreasing the amplification at their resonant frequency to approximately 50% of their zero frequency value. "
"The solution to the transient response problems identified in the above described studies of Mssrs. Weiss, Welch, and Levy and Kroll came as a result of the introduction of the piezoelectric accelerom- eter into the transducer market place. The piezoelectric materials used had high moduli. In addition, their self-generating responses produced wide dynamic signal ranges. Both of these properties combined to enable the design of accelerometers with high resonant frequencies. These high resonant frequencies eliminated the need for damping to extend the accelerometer’s useable flat frequency response. Phase shift over the useable frequency range of the ac- celerometer also was eliminated. This large dynamic signal range also allowed size reduction of piezoelectric accelerometers rela- tive to strain gage accelerometers while providing much higher g capability. As proof of the improved properties of piezoelectric accelerometers for vibration measurements, one can assess National Bureau of Standards reports 6907 and 70665,6 which surveyed the performance of representative piezoelectric and bonded and unbonded strain gage accelerometers manufactured sometime prior to 1960. None of the strain gage accelerometers had flat frequency response above 200 Hz while the piezoelectric accelerometers provided flat response to 10,000 Hz. As Statham Instruments and other transducer companies owe their existence to the develop- ment of the strain gage, a plethora of accelerometer manufacturers owe their existence to the integration of piezoelectric technology into transducers."
"The late 1940s and early 1950s were an exciting time as numer- ous manufacturers of piezoelectric accelerometers came into exis- tence. The piezoelectric materials used included ferroelectric and nonferroelectric (e.g. quartz). "
Gravity is a Radiowave
"A crystal radio receiver, also called a crystal set or cat's whisker receiver, is a very simple radio receiver, popular in the early days of radio. It needs no other power source but that received solely from the power of radio waves received by a wire antenna. It gets its name from its most important component, known as a crystal detector, originally made from a piece of crystalline mineral such as galena. This component is now called a diode.
Crystal radios are the simplest type of radio receiver and can be made with a few inexpensive parts, such as a wire for an antenna, a coil of copper wire for adjustment, a capacitor, a crystal detector, and earphones. Crystal radios are distinct from ordinary radios as they are passive receivers, while other radios use a separate source of electric power such as a battery or the mains power to amplify the weak radio signal so as to make it louder. Thus, crystal sets produce rather weak sound and must be listened to with sensitive earphones, and can only receive stations within a limited range.
The rectifying property of crystals was discovered in 1874 by Karl Ferdinand Braun, and crystal detectors were developed and applied to radio receivers in 1904 by Jagadish Chandra Bose, G. W. Pickard and others. Crystal radios were the first widely used type of radio receiver, and the main type used during the wireless telegraphy era. Sold and homemade by the millions, the inexpensive and reliable crystal radio was a major driving force in the introduction of radio to the public, contributing to the development of radio as an entertainment medium with the beginning of radio broadcasting around 1920.
Around 1920, crystal sets were superseded by the first amplifying receivers, which used vacuum tubes, after which crystal sets became obsolete for commercial use. They continued to be built by hobbyists, youth groups, and the Boy Scouts however, as a way of learning about the technology of radio. Today they are still sold as educational devices, and there are groups of enthusiasts devoted to their construction
Crystal radios receive amplitude modulated (AM) signals, and can be designed to receive almost any radio frequency band, but most receive the AM broadcast band. A few receive shortwave bands, but strong signals are required. The first crystal sets received wireless telegraphy signals broadcast by spark-gap transmitters at frequencies as low as 20 kHz."
"A crystal oscillator is an electronic oscillator circuit that uses the mechanical resonance of a vibrating crystal of piezoelectric material to create an electrical signal with a precise frequency. This frequency is commonly used to keep track of time, as in quartz wristwatches, to provide a stable clock signal for digital integrated circuits, and to stabilize frequencies for radio transmitters and receivers. The most common type of piezoelectric resonator used is the quartz crystal, so oscillator circuits incorporating them became known as crystal oscillators but other piezoelectric materials including polycrystalline ceramics are used in similar circuits.
Quartz crystals are manufactured for frequencies from a few tens of kilohertz to hundreds of megahertz. More than two billion crystals are manufactured annually. Most are used for consumer devices such as wristwatches, clocks, radios, computers, and cellphones. Quartz crystals are also found inside test and measurement equipment, such as counters, signal generators, and oscilloscopes."
Monkees - Daydream Believer - Great Audio Quality. Music Video From MTV.