THE ZTNEROL EXPANSION 
                             by 
                   DENNIS McCLAIN-FURMANSKI 
 
[Dedicated to the scientific advances proposed by D. Adams] 
 
     The Theory of Relativity has been around long enough 
now for many to grasp its fundamental importance. 
Egomaniacal astronomers and aging British actors are only 
two of the kinds of people who've been able to cash in on 
the excitement. The basis for some of the popularity has 
been called "the twins paradox" (1), where one twin stays on 
earth, while the other zips about creation at relativistic 
speeds; the earthbound grows old while the intrepid stays 
young. The story never relates as to whether the earthbound 
got all the girls in the other's absence, but it's a safe 
assumption. But I digress. (2) 
     The mathematical theorem which Smiling Albert used with 
such finesse and verve as to allow others to make careers 
out of its presentation is called the Lorentz Contraction 
equation. (3) In its mathematical form: 
                      ________________ 
Time observed        /       2    2         Time passed 
to pass        =   \/ 1 - ( V  / C  )   x   "at home" 
where V is the velocity traveled, and C of course is the 
speed of light. 
 
     What it shows, simply stated, is that the faster you 
go, the slower time runs for you, so that when you arrive 
home after a long day's jaunt about the universe, you find 
it to be next month and your credit card bills are overdue 
and have had interest added to them. The vicarious thrill of 
watching this happen is probably the reason that science 
shows are so popular with the Public Broadcasting Network 
crowd, rather than the prime time "top 3" viewers, who own 
Ronco products purchased with money orders from convenience 
stores. 
     There are also portions of the theory which have not 
been popularized in this manner, basically because no 
scriptwriter has been able to figure out how to make use of 
them. These other portions state that the faster you go, the 
more mass you gain (4), and the faster you go, the shorter 
you become in the direction of travel. There are, of course, 
parallel equations for these phenomena, but I won't belabor 
the point by reproducing them all here. (5) 
     It is the last of these that I intend to take issue 
with, as I have deduced a method of making use of it. 
     This effect, which I have named the Ztnerol Expansion, 
is simply the reverse of the equation showing the decrease 
is size. If, the closer to the speed of light you get, the 
shorter you get in the direction of travel, then obviously 
the slower you go the longer you get. If, at the speed of 
light, the dimension shrinks to zero (the equations shows 
this is the case) then at a speed of zero, length should 
expand to infinity. 
     The practical aspect of this startling revelation is 
easy to derive. Travel usually proceeds by positive 
acceleration in the direction desired, and after an amount 
of time has passed you arrive at your destination. My 
proposal is to obtain the state of arrival by instead, 
slowing down to absolute zero velocity, at which time you 
would have expanded along the line of travel to every point 
in the universe. 
     This would be extremely handy for those who suddenly 
change their minds and wish to go elsewhere instead, as they 
already are. It would also be of use to those who forgot to 
turn off the stove or whatnot, as they're also still at the 
starting point. (6) 
     The primary objection to this idea is the common sense 
notion that things are already at rest, so why aren't they 
infinite in length? Obviously, they are not at rest. The 
Earth rotates at 1,000 miles per hour at the equator, it 
revolves around the sun at 66,000 miles per hour, the sun is 
traveling through the galactic arm, which is rotating around 
the galactic core, and the galaxy is moving away from all 
others as a result of the Big Bang. All that moving about 
makes things the size that they are. Any disagreement with 
this can be met and conquered with the derision usually 
reserved for flat-earth fanatics and macrobiotic kharma 
channelers. We're obviously not the center of the universe, 
why should we expect that we're at rest with respect to 
everything else? 
     Any attempt at achieving this zero velocity point will 
have to be done in free space, as all bodies in the universe 
are already in motion. I propose then, a rocket be built 
with a radically different design departure. 
     All rockets built so far have the engines at the 
bottom, for thrust directed downwards, and an increase in 
velocity upwards, or at least forwards if already in space. 
Note, this is intended to be a positive velocity increase. 
My design would be to build a rocket with the engines on 
top, or at the front for a spaceborne rocket. Rather than 
speeding the rocket up, these will slow it down by giving it 
a negative increase in velocity. 
     It must be understood that these are not the same as 
conventional reentry or "retro" rocket engines. Those are 
invariably rear mounted engines, and the spacecraft is 
maneuvered so they are pointing forwards. They are in fact 
facing the proper direction, but the spacecraft is not. This 
design requires that the engines be built in the nose of the 
craft, facing the same direction as the crew, as no 
scientifically trained crew is going to sit facing backwards 
while moving forwards. Even the most veteran subway riders 
are loath to travel thus. (8) 
     I would propose then, that a rocket be built, upside 
down as it were, and launched. I might suggest the unused 
Saturn V displayed by NASA, as it's already paid for. It 
would be mounted upside down at the launch complex, but with 
the crew module rightside up. A tunnel through the Earth 
would have to be dug. Then the rocket would be launched down 
through the tunnel, emerging from the other side of the 
Earth with the astronauts hell bent for leather slowing 
down. As their speed decreases, they will gain in length. 
They can keep an eye on the speedometer and adjust their 
direction if they find they're traveling in such a way that 
their slowing does not cancel out all motion. 
     When they finally achieve zero velocity, they will be 
everywhere at the same time, and not moving, so that they 
can get out anywhere they like for a look around. (9) 
     To arrive back home in their normal state, they have 
merely to rotate the crew module to the opposite direction, 
turn their craft around, and speed up. 
     Since all the astronauts currently is service have been 
trained in conventional astro-navigation, it would be too 
costly to retrain them. Instead, I propose a different 
source of manpower. 
     With the current top heavy organization at NASA, chock 
full of so many managers that the design of Space Station 
Freedom is falling apart before it even gets built, I 
suggest administrators be pressed into service for this 
mission. 
     While it may seem to some an unpleasant prospect, 
having management present at all points, I can only answer 
with these two replies: 
     (A) Is that so different from the way it is now? And 
     (B) Besides, I might be wrong. Think "expendable",      
like the vast majority of the rocket equipment 
         they continue to build at a cost of millions 
         of dollars apiece, designed to be thrown away 
after flawless performance. 
 
 
    ---------------- Footnotes ---------------- 
 
(1) This is unrelated to the paradox of a baseball team 
originating in a state where the ground is covered with snow 
for a majority of the year. 
 
(2) From di- meaning two and -gress meaning to move. 
Literally, moving in two directions, the basis for this 
paper, which you would see if you got your nose out of the 
footnotes and got on with the text. But as long as you're 
here, you might as well be told that the word is also 
*related to progress, to move forward, and congress, to move 
backwards. Now get back up there. Go on. That's it. 
 
(3) Lorentz is a dead guy. Dead guys get all the good stuff 
named after them. 
 
(4) Bad for business. You can't get advertisers or PBS to 
broadcast something involving gaining weight. 
 
(5) I do so know what they are. Look, I knew who Lorentz 
was, didn't I? Alright, then. 
 
(6) I didn't have a footnote in a while. I like to keep 
things consistent. 
 
(7) An interesting psychological effect can be observed by 
breaking a subject's concentration repeatedly. They may 
begin to pay attention to the distraction rather than the 
primary focus and become confused. This is exactly what 
happens when they notice a footnote number they seem to have 
missed, and go looking back through the text for the 
reference to it, without reading the errant message that 
tells them that there was no reference in the text. Now, how 
many of you went looking for number seven before you got 
this far? Be honest. 
 
(8) Personal observation. Radicals in the theoretic physics 
line don't generally get salaries like those sell out wimps 
at the universities and laboratories. 
 
(9) Not even considered yet is the effect on slowing down to 
mass. As you approach the speed of light, mass increases 
towards infinite. As you slow down, mass would decrease, 
making the engines more efficient with less mass to push 
towards zero velocity. Implicit in this is the reason why 
cars never get as good of mileage as their EPA stickers 
state; faster means more mass and more fuel required. 
You mileage may vary indeed. 
 
 -------------------