Re: Want to prove E=mc²? University labs should try this!

On Mon, 18 Nov 2024 14:41:26 +0000, gharnagel wrote:

On Mon, 18 Nov 2024 4:22:56 +0000, rhertz wrote:

>
1) You obviously don't know anything about almost perfect
reflectivity of advanced coating materials, like the ones
used in the mirrors of the LIGO instrument, which reflect
with ultra-high effectivity 40 Watts lasers, which are
reflected 18,750 times to obtain the cumulative power
of 750,000 watts before the composite beam reach the
detector. Make some research on this.

>
750,000 Watts?!  That's ridiculous! :-))

Read this, from Caltech. The descriptions are based on 2008 technology:
https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/page/ligo-technology
Read this. from the original LIGO team (1998).
https://dcc.ligo.org/public/0000/P070082/004/P070082-v4.pdf
Some insights, that I try to resume for you:
1) Laser power on each arm is incremented about 300 times, to obtain an
effective length of about 1,000 Km. Once each beam has bounced such an
amount, on each arm, they are combined (Michelson like interferometer)
so the OUTPUT directed over the photodetector is ZERO.
The laser is a highly stabilized infrared laser of 1064 nanometers.
Initially, the laser power was relatively low, around 10 Watts, but it
was increased over the years up to 50 Watts. This power is amplified
inside the interferometer using power recycling and resonant Fabry-Perot
 cavities, increasing the effective circulating power in the arms to
hundreds of kilowatts (up to 750 kW in the most recent configurations).
Higher laser power reduces the shot noise, a quantum noise source that
limits the sensitivity of the interferometer, improving the precision of
the signal detected, once both beams are combined, resulting in a
destructive interference, so the input to the photodetector is ZERO in
normal conditions. The sensitivity allows detecting length variations in
the order of 10E-18 mts.
<snip>

I wrote CLEARLY that the weight of each cavity is 2.00 grams.

>
Which would quickly burn up because of the losses.
>

They are done with very thin composite materials, much more
advanced than acrylic mirrors, in the order of 99.999+ % of
reflectivity. Make your calculations again.

2) The reflectivity of the mirrors is so high that it reflect all but
one of every 5 million photons that hit them. This means a reflectivity
of 99.99998 %.
This reflectivity means that only 10 μW/hit are absorbed by the mirrors.
As the beam inside the proposed cavity is deflected so it barely hit the
same spot in 1 second, the absorbed energy per spot inside the cavity is
about 10 μJoules/sec = 0.036 Joules/Hr = 0.0086 calories/hour x spot.
Considering that I wrote that the GENERATED HEAT in the entire cavity is
EXTRACTED by the proper use of refrigeration (and also measured), the
environment in which the cavity resides REMAIN IN THERMAL EQUILIBRIUM.
<snip>

I'm an EE,

>
So am I ... and a physicist.
>

and I don't write idiocies when dealing with details of
experiments involving technology.

>
Apparently, you do :-)
>
750,000 watts?!!! :-))
>

I'm very careful with numbers.

>
But you ignore physics.  LIGO does NOT build up 750,000 Watts!
It's an interferometer.  The light doesn't go back and forth
between mirrors 18000 times.  It is split between two arms,
goes 4 km down each arm, is reflected by mirrors at the end,
comes back and the two beqams go to a detector.  End of story.
You are conflating LIGO with something completely different.
>
You are speculating a build up of energy inside your little
ball.  With 99.9999% reflectivity each time the light bounces
off the wall, CALCULATE how many times that light must bounce
in 72 hours.  What's left will be a skinny zero.  CALCULATE
where all that lost energy goes!  The only answer is heat.
Your little ball goes poof!

I CLEARLY WROTE: REFRIGERATED, with vibrations cancelled AND ALMOST IN
VACUUM. Both actions are measured. Vacuum can be as high as
one-trillionth that of sea level, which means there are about 10 million
molecules per cubic centimeter.
If you don't like the amplification to 750,000 Watts from 50 Watts, go
and comply with LIGO people, not to me.
<snip>

Reread what I wrote and find out why I suggested an 11 kg ball.
Try to understand that heat is E = mc^2 energy, too.  Since
your little ball gets trashed because it overheats, USE the heat
for the experiment.  Use the 5W laser to heat the ball.
>
I also showed what would happen if you reduced the size of
the ball (poof!).  It's still ridiculous because the proposed
scales is too fragile to handle the weight.

I clearly wrote: 2 grams/cavity and 1,000 cm³ each.
I didn't say that the experiment was going to be cheap. Maybe it's in
the range of ten million USD.
The technology exists today, even when not available for anyone. It is
possible an ad-hoc setup, with materials and subsystems built for this
specific purpose.
Conclusion: The experiment is perfectly possible to be made in 2024.
There are more details left outside this reply, but better in this way.
The proposal is just a sketch, and I cited MAJOR ISSUES only.