2,000 Greater & Lesser Mysteries/2,000 Greater and Lesser Mysteries.iso/altscien/mys00036.txt

Text File | 1994-06-10 | 9.4 KB | 193 lines

                    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.

 -------------------