This thread is for the open minded discussion of Mr. Martin Grusenick's interferometer experiment. I learned of it from a post by Rosemary Ainslie in the heater thread. This video has the demo:

YouTube - Extended Michelson-Morley Interferometer experiment. English version

I have emailed Mr. Martin Grusenick to ask him to share his knowledge with us here. His email is on his video and if anyone else is inclined to email him to invite him here, that may be helpful in case there are any problems with my email.

That experiment seems to suggest that the aether drift is equal to the voltage polarity of the atmosphere and the earth, and perpendicular to the magnetic field of the earth.

So the aether drift sounds like it may be responsible for 'gravity'.

superb

I was reading again about the 1887 experiments at Case Western Reserve U.

I have seen the actual apparatus Michelson & Morley built, which is enshrined in the lobby of the Engineering School building there.

Before when this subject was covered in school (...and the the old-timer scientists made to sound silly & stupid with their ridiculous insistence of an "Active Aether" lol), i never thought to ask this extremely elemental question... In retrospect is sounds like such a no-brainer to test it in both directions.

It makes me wonder what other "automatic givens" i have not thought to ask about lol

If this experiment is accurately showing what it appears to be showing, then it simply gives more credit to my gravitational explanation in my book that as mass displaces the aether the aether rebounds back towards the direction from where it was displaced - meaning that gravity is always a downward push and is not a gravitational pull.

It never comes to equilibrium in the middle of the planet because there are transformations that occur that allow for the rising of various "particles" back towards the surface.

Anyway, that downward aetheric push exerts a push on the mass of an atom and that is what pushes it to the ground in my opinion.

I do hope that Martin Grusenick does join this forum and share his own ideas of what is happening.

No matter the explanation of what or why this is happening, it appears to show that Michelson & Morley always had the direction wrong based on false assumptions that many of us have always believed. If the aether was moving like what Michelson & Morley was looking for, we'd all be sliding sideways on the ground - forever pushing against an invisible wind. lol

James Demeo has done his own experiments that also show evidence of the aether, which of course contradicts Michelson & Morley.

I believe the results of this experiment also lends support to Rosemary's magnetic field model.

My own take on this extraordinary experiment by von Grusenick is that the results seem to tally with evidence of magnetic fields - somehow. Not only is there the clear difference in the change at the east/west polarities (indicating a smoothness in the field) but the angle at which the change happens appears to be at the north/south axis - if one takes the angle of the camera and the lenses into account. The difference is then, possibly - in the fact that our own true north is off the vertical plane and maybe this would conflict with my conclusion. Just don't know and would love to hear what others think.

The other factor that possibly mitigates against this being a magnetic field is that the fields are apparently subject to change depending on the hour of the day or night. Presumably then too, and according to Allais, there could be changes relating to seasons et al. But for this von Grusenick would need to do longer tests and am not sure if he's even considering the possibility of this being magnetic in nature. I will definitely see if I can contact him. Who knows?

Of interest is that I've checked up on alternative experiments on evidence for aether. Just as seminal as Michelson-Morley experiment. Remember guys, the test has only ever shown that within reasonable margins of error no evidence was there. Not that aether was not extant. Einstein managed his Special Theory of Relativity without any need for this. But he never actually discounted the existence as a possibility. And of the many subsequent tests to prove it - some were done to precisely obviate magnetic fields. But the use of the interferometer experiments seemed to have been conducted on the horizontal plane - exclusively. As Jibbguy mentioned - an obvious oversight.

But the fact of aether I think is widely accepted today. It's just that it's called Dark energy. It has the same effect however. We do not need to fight for mainsteam's acceptance of the concept. They've beaten us to it. It's just that the term aether is very carefully omitted.

But how interesting is this. MileHigh - the dreaded sceptic - has already proposed that there is an obvious error in the experiment. I'm trying to find out where. Personally I've viewed the video about half a dozen times and I can't fault it. Has anyone picked up a problem here?

EDIT BTW Of interest is that I saw a youtube video by Harvey that clearly showed that rotation of a magnetic field on the horizontal axis results in no changes in the patterns of magnetic fields on flux. This definitely ties in with the results of the Michelson-Morley results and more particularly with von Grusenick's. ALL JUST SO INTERSTING. I'm certain von Grusenick is looking at magnetic fields as were others doing similar tests. Not sure if this is consistent with aether - but it certainly fits with my own take on the subject.

I wonder what the azimuth of the axis of rotation was and if he tried others?

Hi Poii. I had to look up azimuth and am not sure even now. Either the meridian or the east west axis and always? in a clockwise direction? I also want to know which other angles were studied. I can imagine tilts to test this - more or less on all possible axes through a sphere. But I think that Allais has tested this as it relates to tidal variations, (moon?) and seasonal (sun). There's a link somewhere to allais but I think it's on the overunity.com forum. I'll try and find it - but if it is there its on the 'claimed overunity' thread somewhere towards the end. Am only telling you this as your search will definitely be quicker than mine if you're that interested.

So that was east and west? Did he do a north to south?

He mentioned it is different at different times of day or night.

I would imagine at night would definitely have a stronger impact
on the effect.

Hi Aaron. Not sure who your referencing here but presume it's Allais. I have no idea of his experimental set up but I do know that his conclusions were consistent with von Grusenick. Except that Allais also tested seasons and I think tidal variations. But Allais is not a physicist as such. His interests are economics. And I'm not sure that he's input is really that of a specialist.

But just for the record - MileHigh discounts the evidence on the basis of gravitational stresses on the apparatus as it turns through 360 degrees. I think his concerns are valid - but there's evidently no real distortion to the waveform as it turns through the circle. Else I think MH's argument would be invincible. As it is - it's just nitpicking. His speciality and true genius.

It is easy to measure any warping of the platform at any angle to see if this is the case but I doubt it. The influence on the waves are too smooth and consistent for both halves of the circle.

We'll see. That is a very simple experiment to duplicate. I have my hands full with your circuit now so maybe others will try it.

Grusenick seems smart enough to have considered any platform twisting effects by being vertical, etc... hopefully he will post about this.

I was present when Allais gave his lecture

he has not done any experiment

only he took the data of the miller experiment (1931)
and after correction of "universal time" on this data he get
more accurates datas where he took off the aether speed of 8km/s
( fixe directional speed in the space )

Great experiment,

This is a +5000000 points to free energy. Once the experiment is validate by mainstream, free energy is 99% probable. It will eliminate alot of If, and, and buts. What a pleasant surprise. We must press on this ultimate weapon.

Hi Quantum. I missed this yesterday. Nice to see you around again. Indeed the implications here are really good. I hope the test results prove valid - but there's some question as to the dependability of the results. My personal hope is that von Grusenick will sort out the questions and then maybe publish? That would be just so nice.

Tagor - thanks for the info. Cannot tell you how jealous I am that you could actually attend a lecture here. I presume, therefore, that you speak the 'lingo'. I lived in Paris for a year - in my youth. But can barely remember the language. I actually tried re-reading some Guy De Maupassant stories, to try and jog the fading memory of this. I do hope you'll forgive my reference to Allais being a francophile. But I think it's on record and widely understood. And, for the record, I'm a Parisophile. Nothing quite like it and never to be forgotten. What a city.

Witsend

very nice
Paris is nice but i am to old to stay in a big city
too much noise , and so on ...
all my family is doing champagne ( east of paris )
champagne is nice too !
what do you think of ?

Hi tagor. Not sure if you're asking me about Champagne the drink or Champagne the province. Both are superb. My son drinks nothing but. And I might tell you it's not cheap here to buy the real thing. But nor is there anything like the real thing.

But it's the French food that is just so AMAZING. It's the only time in my life that I put on weight - 10 lbs. And the men. So charming. A rare and unique culture - certainly as I remember it.

APOLOGIES to all for getting off topic.

Thank you witsend,

I hope you're doing well too. This is a very nice test. I went back and read many paper about Michelson-Morley experiment. It seems like the old test was valid and no aether is detected in the plane parallel to earth. This ruled out the static aether. The dragging aether also ruled out by stellar aberration, but it still leave alot of room for creativity about stellar aberration and I believe the answer lies here. I do not see any noticable parameter that could largely effect this apparatus . We'll have to wait and see.

Guys, the sad news is that von Grusenick's test is probably flawed. Not sure if it's nominal or critical. MileHigh discounts the whole thing - not surprisingly - but I'm inclined to think he may just be right. However - BEP has proposed an arrangement that holds - and MORE TO THE POINT - I'm quoting him from memory - ' When doing this same test the +/- shift is seen although little to none is expected...' Something like that. Certainly the essence of his post. He also loosely attributes this to coriolis effects or gravity. But sees this as a small effect. In my book - every little helps. I shall follow this up and will report here. He's on OU.com - and apparently not the troll that I assumed.

Also. I couldn't get my mind around the coriolis effect until I saw a neat video on this. Not sure if anyone else might need this but here's the link.
YouTube - coriolis effect (2-11)

My own opinion on this is that the 'clockwise' - Southern hemisphere and 'anti-clockwise' - Northern hemisphere - can be argued in terms of magnetic fields - perfectly. So. Nothing against it's being earth's magnetism and who knows? Possibly magnetism relates to gravity?

I guess that's a thin argument. But it'll do for now.

I have a different view. Coriolis effect is due to frame of reference. If it is the Coriolis effect, then it also would appear on the horizontal plane when the apparatus is rotated.

If the diffraction pattern changed, then light velocity has changed. I can imagine this is similar to magnetic flux. The line of aether flux could be in the direction of gravity. The change in flux can result in the change in velocity dB=dv . Since rotating parallel to earth surface plane result in no change in flux line, no change in light velocity. Rotating in a plane perpendicular to earth surface resulting in cutting the flux lines and velocity change resulted.
If this is the case, aether field = magnetic field = gravity field.

Could this be the reason that a homopolar generator generates power?
If that generator was laid on its side, with the disk of rotation spinning parallel to the earth, would it still generator power ... or would it fail to do so?

A homopolar generator does NOT operate as a motor when power is applied.

THE WEIRD BUBBLE

Her is the document that I think describe relation between aether field, magnetic field, and gravitation.

http://gravitation.org/Start/Experim...l%20fields.pdf

I think it's not neccessary to attach a magnet to a spinning disk. The spinning disk alone, when rotate fast enough, still give out a voltage differential. My opinion is that the centrifugal force separate out matters in density layers similar to centrifuge extraction of material.

I agree that there are so much in common with gravity, magnetism, electricity, sub atomic forces. After all... they're all forces and acted on matters. This is the reason that pull scientists to the idea of unification. I also believe that they're the same field with different desnity level and field geometry.

Hi Quantumuppercut. I wish it were that simple. I'm still trying to understand why it is that the horizontal rotation doesn't show a difference? That's obviously assuming that the test results point at anything at all.

Are you suggesting this? The earth's flux fields describe a shell around the body of the planet. The outer part of the shell is greater than the inner. I assume multiple layers making the whole of the shell like a series of skins. Then the horizontal axis would intersect at a smooth level with the 'skin' of the shell as at this level. Regardless of the height of the horizontal plane - this would hold - always assuming that each 'skin' is a perfectly smooth field. In which case I can see why the coriolis effect would be obviated when rotated on the horizontal plane.

And, indeed this would then explain the 'differences' as the apparatus then cuts through the vertical plane as you describe it. This could then be attributed to the movement through each 'skin' layer - each one smooth - but each one varying in size and uniformity with the next?

In fact, as this has already been proven and if von Grusenick's test is seen as a corollary to the Michelson-Morley experiment - then it could very well be considered as a test for the existence of magnetic flux. Unfortunately they're both intended to test aether. Nowhere has there been a suggestion from mainstream that aether and magnetism may be the same thing.

And from flux to aether to gravity is the next difficult step. Why should gravity and flux have anything at all to do with one another? I agree with you. But there must surely be some substantive argument to take it to these conclusions?

What an interesting subject.

Morpher - I just don't know. I read up the link. How interesting. My own guess here would be that as magnetic fields can shield themselves from other magnetic fields then the rotation of the disk parallel to the earth would make no difference. But I really have no idea.

Is this Bearden's philosophy? I must say it's seductive. My argument against this, would be that - consider how many electrons there are loosely bound to the atomic energy levels. If each one's movement precipitated such complex interactions with the 'aether?' then chaos would abound. In fact there is a general orderliness to matter. I'm quoting loosely from the conclusions to Bell's theorems (which I hasten to add that I do not understand) which states something like 'the statistical predictions of quantum theories cannot be upheld by local hidden variables'. This conclusion is clear and unambiguous. That required 'orderliness' has to carry through all aspects of our visible and measurable.

I liked the picture of the spaceship. But I very much doubt it would work. Still. It's seductive. The argument nearly holds. IMHO

I can see that you start sounding like Harvey

Yes, your description is exactly what I meant. You described it in orthogonal lines to mine as mine is orthogonal lines to yours. In fluid mechanic, one is potential line and the other line is path line. I do not see the Coriolis effect comes into play with the laser. My line is 90 degree to your zipons flow if it's easier to visualize.

The unify field theory is intended to unify all fields into one, so if one say aether and magnetism or gravity are different, then why bother unify them? Like I stated, they're different in density. Gravity is less dense than magnetic field from a bar magnet. That's why it pass though metal easy and the dense magnetic field from bar magnet get blocked. Light is even denser than magnetic, then air, then water, then solid...etc...

Hi Quantumuppercut. I agree. In fact I see the challenge as being to explore the extent to which the magnetic may correspond to aether. But then one must not use the word aether as it's still too controversial. Maybe 'dark matter'? For some obscure reason this is more acceptable. Strange how picky are our mainstream thinkers.

'Like Harvey?' That's a compliment. Certainly no comparison in degree of knowledge. Not by a long shot. Unlike me - he knows whereof he speaks. But I'm more adventurous and explorative. And I give myself full license here - being unconstrained by the demands of logic. Lol.

This article

Michelson–Morley experiment is best yet - physicsworld.com

which is from 9/14/09 implies
Michelson–Morley experiment is just fine.

you can get the miller data here :

http://www.wbabin.net/miller.pdf

and analysis of this data :

Dayton Miller's Ether-Drift Experiments


and a lot of reference to allais ...

to einstein , relativity and so on

Hi morpher44. I checked out the link. All they've done is refined the apparatus and measurement on the horizontal plane. Nothing about the vertical. Why is this never considered? Seems strange.