sobota 27. června 2009

AWT and multiple time dimensions

Concept of multiple time dimensions is dual to atemporal universe concept and AWT supports them both. In mathematical physics, a framework of equations is often put forward to model the physical universe. In some sense, a dimension simply means that a mathematical variable exists in some equation, allowing the use of certain mathematical tools. The physical implications of multiple dimensions are theoretical, at best; as it is not always clear what real meaning these extra dimensions actually have. Ascribing real, physical existence to multi-dimensional universes is largely a fringe idea and is not widely accepted amongst the scientific community because of lack of experimental support. Note that the concept of multiple time arrows excludes the concept of single God and creation, both predicate logics of formal math rigor, which are based on single causual time arrow and as such is thereofore refused both by deists, both by proponents of mathematical universe.

While multiple time concept gains popularity in recent time in the similar way, like atemporal universe (1, 2, 3, 4), deeper insight of AWT is greatly welcomed here. One of the first physicists to suggest the idea of inverse time variable was P.A.Dirac for his antimatter formalism in the 1930s and Andrei Sakharov in the 1970s. S. Hawking later proposed the concept of imaginary time on background of imaginary complex numbers, used in quantum mechanics. A second temporal dimension is also seen in Penrose's twistor theory.

F-theory is a branch of string theory introduced by Cumrun Vafa, who develops mathematical descriptions, which involved a second time variable, reportedly. While it's said, many branches of F-theory involve multiple temporal (time) dimensions, Ed Witten has argued, that the second time dimension of F-theory is only a mathematical fiction used to simplify calculations. Put simply, Witten accepts additional spatial dimensions, but acceptance of at least one additional temporal dimension is less popular amongst researchers. It was established after recent discussion on Wikipedia, that F-theory is not a "two-time" theory of physics, because it has metric signature (11,1). This controversy documented illustrates the depth of confusion in contemporary physics, where clear interpretation of piles of formal equations, mechanically derived by various theorists from mutually inconsistent postulate sets remains completely unclear.

Nevertheless, from AWT perspective the situation is still quite synoptic, here. Until F-theory is claimed to be part of string theory, it's expected to follow Lorentz invariance as one of fundamental postulates of string theory. And the Lorentz invariance violates the concept of multiple radiative time arrows, so no place for additional time arrow exists in context of whatever version of string theory. Indeed, such constrain violates the concept of hidden dimensions too, because these compacted dimensions should manifests itself just by violation of Lorentz invariance, which renders string theory a fringe theory as a whole. The situation is even more complicated by fact, contemporary physics distinguishes many definitions of time, the definitions of time arrow in particular - which aren't guaranteed to be compatible mutually under various conditions. This case just illustrates the depth of general level of confusion in contemporary physics and the urgent need of robust conceptual basis based on predicate logics, i.e. in similar way, like formal math remains based so far.

AWT just illustrates, it's a refusal of Aether concept, which prohibits us to see the hidden dimensions all around us - in this sense, it belongs between bests supporters of string theory concepts. Despite of this, the perspective of multiple time dimensions is just a special observational perspective based on exsintric (quantum theory oriented) view of reality and it has no place in strictly local and causual insintric perspective, as being used in relativity, in special relativity theory in particular. The mixing of exsintric and insintric perspective isn't recommended here, as it leads to mathematical singularities and conceptual confusion, above presented.

The general understanding of radiative and thermodynamics time arrow in context of omnidirectional Universe expansion is, the forward time arrow leads to expansion of matter into smaller particles, including particles of radiation, i.e. bosons. This is the reason, why we cannot travel in time in larger extent, or we would evaporate or collapse. Evaporation is generally considered as a spontaneous process during which the entropy increases. But such view isn't quite general, because it's generally followed by spontaneous symmetry breaking, i.e. condensation of matter into larger groups as a result of gravitational collapse. Because physicists aren't sure, which process is "more spontaneous" here, the omnidirectional expansion of space-time from insintric perspective can be considered dual to gravitational collapse of matter, forming such space-time. In AWT the general boundary separating both these perspectives is completely observer dependent, i.e. the CMB or human scale, which is adopted to CMB scale.

Briefly speaking, all objects larger then CMB photons tends to condense by shielding effect of these photons, while the smaller ones are separated. The CMB scale corresponds the scale of solitons inside of human brains, as it brings the maximal degree of complexity, which we can interact with in common life. From human perspective every birth alternates death, the smaller organisms then CMB photons are serving like parasites or source of food for these larger ones, the droplets of rain smaller then CMB photons would evaporate in rain on behalf of larger ones due the surface dependency of vapor tension, and so on. From our observational perspective one half of universe matter would evaporate into CMB photons due the proton decay, while the rest of it will condense into black holes of the same size in the similar way, like false vacuum has separated into matter and antimatter during inflation. As we can see, we can met with dual time arrows all around us, because with respect of time dimensions our world is quite symmetrical and reversible and no prevailing arrow of entropy exists here, in fact.

From general perspective of AWT both history, both future of observable part of our Universe remains fragmentized into infinitelly many time arrows like foam membrane, which manifests by quantum uncertainty on both macroscopic scale (the past), both microscopic scale (the future). It means, time has a character of fractal foam or tree (1) in the same way, like the space foam - just dual to the later one. While such perspective is dual to atemporal Universe, we can say safely, both groups of scientists have their side of truth, here.

Art and curvature of space-time

Being general theory, AWT explains many aspects of symmetry and periodicity in art and beauty theory. For example in Aether theory a fuzzy boundary exists between insintric and exsintric observational perspective, which affects the perceiving of space-time curvature bellow and above human distance scale. Insintric perspective corresponds the deterministic, curvature geometry based view of relativity, where space-time is considered deformed, while path of light remains straight due Lorentz invariance. Exsintric perspective corresponds the perspective of quantum mechanics, which considers undeformed Hilbert space, while path of light is deformed heavily, thus forming fuzzy reality composed of overlapped particles, where Lorentz invariance remains violated heavily. Bellow human distance scale the meaning of both these perspectives becomes reversed.

In this context an interesting question may arise, whether some objective, curvature based boundary between impressionism and expressionism in visual art exist? In general, impressionism is earlier movement, related to rather optimistic illustrations of real exteriors oriented to future - whereas the expressionism is more recent movement, connected more to internal, abstract and tragical feeling of the past. Abstract or psychical impressionism is based on intuitive preference of overlapping spots (tachism), where positive curvatures and altitude prevails, while expressionism is more rational art, based on curves and lines with zero or negative curvature and pessimistic connotations (informel). Note that expressionistic art is often generated mechanically or by algoritmic digital techniques. The distance scale between positive curvature of blobs and negative curvature of areas and lines still remains around 1.7 cm, i.e. at range of CMB wavelength scale.

Psychic impressionism of Jeff Lewis, 2001:

Jackson Pollock, Autumn rhythm, 1950:

Karin Kuhlmann: Inflammable matter, 2005:

Such perspective would explain the subliminal value (and objective price) of J. Pollock's abstract oil drip "paintings", which are of fractal nature (albeit their fractal dimension is rather low) and where the spot and lines feature of 2D curvature remains rather balanced in it - so they appear most transformable/transformative from our subconscious view, because they illustrate dual character of Aether foam in its critical Lifshitz point most exactly.

úterý 23. června 2009

AWT and atemporal universe

In recent time the popularity of atemporal (timeless) Universe concept gained in similar way, like the popularity of emergence concept. This is not so surprising, because human understanding converges to Aether model rather quickly and both emergence, both atemporality belongs between important aspects of behavior of dense particle field. Such dense particle system is highly chaotic and atemporal and because no energy can propagate through it at distance, it can be considered "aspatial" as well. It simply has no meaning from causal perspective, as it behaves like empty void singularity with respect to energy and information spreading at distance. Unfortunately, just because various proponents of atemporal concept (J.A. Wheeler, D. Bohm, P. Yourgrau, Dennis A. Wright, J. Barbour's, P. Lynds, Ron Larther, Amrit S. Sorli and many others) didn't connected it with Aether concept explicitly, the concept of atemporality was left ignored by mainstream because of apparent lack of easy to follow (if any..) testable predictions (like the absence of global enthropy changes). Pure tautological idea without arrow of implicate logic isn't apparently enough even for positivistic approach of contemporary science from utilitarian reasons - no energy gradient has occured here.

In AWT the concept of time remains perfectly dual to concept of space. We can even imagine a hypothetical civilization, which would navigate through its dual Universe via time intervals mediated by longitudinal waves like bats - i.e. in dual way to human creatures, who are using space interval and transversal waves for such purpose (you can get the sample of bat clicking sound here). Therefore the concept of atemporal Universe is symmetric to concept of aspatial Universe and we can replace both of them by Aether concept easily without apparent lost of information.

This is because Aether concept still appears slightly more general, then the time or space concept and we can understand the relevance of particle nature of underwater for character of surface wave spreading even at the moment, when no surface wave can spread through it at all. This is because causal energy spreading in transversal waves isn't the only possible way of energy spreading and the longitudinal energy spreading is possible here, too. In addition, the concepts of both time, both space are rather abstract and derived from concept of particle environment like sand of water, which human mind has experienced first during its evolution. Therefore the water surface can serve as a good model for understanding of atemporal Universe concept. For example, we can imagine our space-time like 3D analogy of water surface, which we can observe via transversal surface waves only. What would we see on this surface?

At medium distance our view of 2D reality at water surface wouldn't differ very much from view of causal reality in 3D space. The so called capillary waves exhibit most pronounce transversal character of surface waves at 1.7 cm wavelength/distance scope and we can use them for explanation of relativity and Lorentz invariance concept in AWT. But at different dimensional scale our perspective would change radically.

At smaller distances the spreading of surface waves becomes dispersed into longitudinal waves by Brownian motion of water particles. These particles cannot be never seen by surface waves, because no object can serve both like subject, both like mean of observation at the same moment. But they still would lead to blurring of observable reality analogous to our observation of quantum phenomena at microscopic scale.

At the distant scale our view of reality would become analogous. As we know, only longitudinal waves can propagate at distance as so called gravity waves. It means, our vision of distant reality would become chaotic and blurry in the same way, like our observation of closest reality mediated by cosmic microwave background radiation. Gravity waves are related to vortices and tornados formation in fluids in analogous way, like gravitational waves in vacuum are related to black hole formation. Note that from exsintric perspective gravity waves remain tranversal ones in the same way, like capillary waves remains transversal from insintric perspective. We can met with 2D/3D version of T-duality and AdS/CFT correspondence in wave spreading here and because we can observe all artifacts in dual way, we can use water surface model for easy to understand prediction/explanation of quantum uncertainty principle. Note that the symmetry of longitudinal wave scale is violated toward longer wavelength even in logaritmic scale (compare the celerity curve for water above) - and we can use it for prediction/explanation of accelerated Universe expansion and CPT symmetry violation from particle simulation of space-time brane gradients as well.

Believe it or not, such view would change radically our understanding of cosmology at large scales. It would mean, our Universe is basically infinite and atemporal both at large, both at small scales and no real evolution or enthropy arrow occurs here. It would mean, what we can see in Hubble ultra deep field is not the formation of first galaxies in dark ages - it's just a foggy boundary of our part of Universe. It would mean, remote galaxies are widespread into infinity - we just cannot see them clearly. We can compare such view to the observation of landscape under haze. From distance every distant place appears blurry and foggy, although we can still believe, it would appear rather clear and transparent from local perspective. Every distant observer at the boundary of visible Universe would see our part of Universe from distant past in the similar manner, which we can experience in ultra deep Hubble field by now.

I do believe, the true motivation of atemporal Universe concept exist in a deep relativeness of observational perspective - but from AWT perspective this perspective isn't quite general, because it's dual to local perspective, which is indeed temporal and it has no meaning to generalize it for human observer, because we could not survive and/or exchange information in atemporal Universe anyway. Just the replacement of naked eye by devices enables us to interact with it vicariously. So we can always ask, which perspective may be more relevant for us - the remote abstract perspective dedicated to human intuition, which enables us understand and generalize - or the deeply local perspective represented by causal logics and formal math, which enables us to concretize and describe exactly the neighboring reality? From this perspective the atemporal Aether concept remains dual to fractal nested geometrodynamic concept - while the former one is still way way more palatable for human mind. We can still think, why is it so...

For me the most surprising aspect of AWT isn't the Aether concept itself - but a fact, nobody did ever attempted to think in such straightforward way. The common disbelief in Aether concept made people completely blind for dual vision of reality for long years. This should serve as a sufficient warning for human civilization: no matter how advanced it becomes, it may still remain quite primitive and short-seeing at certain level of thinking.

pondělí 15. června 2009

Did Aether concept hit the mainstream at last?

By Arthur Schopenhauer all truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed and ignored. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted in quiet as being self-evident. It seems, dense Aether concept has reached its third stage by now. This post is a reaction to recent article Remarks on the world-sheet saga of Prof. Bert Schroer. As Jacques Distler has independently figured out on Clifford Johnson's blog, Schroer's general "reasoning" goes as follows:
  1. Only zero-dimensional particles are acceptable building blocks in physics. ..Wtf...?!?
  2. So string theory must be a theory of point-like particle fields with infinitely many components, too.
    (The only question is, why scientists have realized just after forty years of string theory existence..)
  3. This localization is inconsistent with the idea of world-sheets and the string theoretical interpretation of T-duality.
The expected denouncement of Lubos Motl had to follow. Every introduction of Aether model into physics fulfills predictable scenario, in which particle model will be used for politics and disposal of private animosities, rather then for reconciliation of existing theories. The pluralistic character of AWT model would be ignored during such confrontation completely. The problem isn't indeed in string theory, but in its postulate set. String theory is just formal layer built upon postulates, which could be reformulated anytime later. But because it's popularity serves as source of grant money for theoretical physicists, it's leads to easily predictable situation, when various people would add new and new postulates into theory, while ignoring former ones in order to call the result string theory anyway.

T-duality is the stand of (T)orroidal duality. We can imagine formation of such duality by torsion field inside of repulsing particle system or elastic fluid, which we would jump on like onto heavy urethane mattress. During which toroidal torsion deformations will be formed. At the moment, when the energy density/frequency of undulations exceed certain level, the inertia of environment must be taken into account and new daughter generation of smaller vortices perpendicular to original direction will be formed, and so on... In fluid mechanics this mechanism of vortex propagation is called Widnall's instability. From this follows, its a toroidal symmetry, which connect small and large distances by R-1/R relation. It's a continuous version of one to many duality, as expressed in following scheme:

Which conclusion follows from the above insights for string theory? Well, none specific. String theory is a theory of 1-dimensional quantum objects, which were later extended to N-dimensional quantum objects in M-theory. It's NOT theory of particle field or quantum loops or whatever else - and as such it's fully defined by its postulate set (or at least it should be..). It has no meaning to speculate, if description of T-duality or wordsheet in existing string theory is consistent or not, until it follows from string theory postulates in rigorous way. The introduction of quantum loops or particle field into string theory is indeed possible and string field theory or string net liquid concept takes account into it. But such theories aren't string theory anymore and they can lead to completely different predictions, then the AWT or string theory in its classical form and we cannot expect consistency in anything.

Until we believe, only zero-dimensional particles are acceptable building blocks of physics, no additional constrains or postulates of string theory are required to make such concept testable and predictable - or such theory becomes overloaded by its postulates, thus leading into new generation of fuzzy landscape of many possible solutions.

neděle 14. června 2009

Can dimensionful quantities change?

This post is a reaction to recent deduction of Lubos Motl "Changes of dimensionful quantities are unphysical", presented on his blog. As Lubos belongs between conservative proponents of formal approach to theoretical physics, string theory in particular, his stance can be understood easily in this context. String theories are rather large group of quantum field theories, which are based on combination of quantum mechanics and special relativity postulates - between many others, which are specified less or more vaguely by math formalism used. Because Lorentz invariance belongs special relativity postulates, it's evident, string theory cannot derive violation its own assumptions, i.e. Lorentz invariance violation in rigorous way with compare to quantum gravity theory, which is general relativity based, so it uses a different postulate set. Therefore we can understand negativistic stance to all theories dual to Lorentz invariance, which are considering the changes in fundamental quantities, the "varying light speed" theories in particular.

In AWT Lorentz invariance is completely matter of observational perspective. The gravitational lensing can be interpreted both like manifestation of variable light speed in vacuum near massive object (an exsintric perspective of quantum mechanics), both like manifestation of constant light speed in curved space-time (an insintric general relativity perspective). The observer, which is deformed together with space-time inside of gravitational lens would have an tendency to consider light speed invariant and space-time deformed, unfortunately its rather abstract and local stance, as real observer usually cannot stay at the center of gravity lens (for example at the center of Sun or large galaxy).

The crucial point is the definition of fundamental SI units here, the meter and seconds units in particular. Until 1975 light speed was defined by using of iridium meter prototype since the second can be defined more precisely than the metre, in 1983 the metre was re-defined to be the distance light travels in a vacuum in 1299,792,458 of a second, making the speed of light in vacuum a defined constant, c = 299,792,458 m/s. By AWT the omnidirectional space-time expansion can be interpreted as a fall of observable matter into black hole, the surface gradient of which is forming space-time. During this process vacuum becomes more dense gradually, so that transversal waves of light spreads more slowly through it, which the observer inside of it can interpret as an expansion of space-time. Whereas the observer which is using exsintric perspective would see the collapse of vacuum foam instead - from this reasons the cosmological constants differs so much in relativity and quantum mechanics. In SI system of units meter unit cannot change with density of vacuum and the second unit can change only if mass of cesium atoms will change with respect to kilogram unit, which may occur only, if cesium atoms will change their mass in dense vacuum in different way, then the iridium alloy. After then even gravity constant and fine structure constant may change (compare the Expanding Earth theory). The decrease of gravity constant would increase the frequency of supernovae used as a standard candles for measurement of distance and change our understanding of acceleration of Universe expansion observed. Recent measurements of a possible variation of the gravitational constant showed an upper limit for a relative change of 5•10-12, while Expanding Earth theory needs a variation ten times higher than that measured. Changes in dimensionless fine structure constant observed in distant quasars and Oclo reactor are still unconfirmed.

From insintric perspective the massive bodies would expand together with space-time, but because space-time is preexpanded already, massive objects smaller then human/CMB distance scale (1,7 cm) would collapse slowly then the vacuum and they would shrink effectively, whereas larger object would expand faster in the form of radiation (i.e. they would evaporate in vacuum into bosons), until they fill the volume of the whole universe like gummi bears inserted into hot watter. It's evident, if we would measure the distance by wavelength of light, this distance wouldn't change, but the large massive objects would expand gradually and they would evaporate losing their mass. This prediction of AWT was confirmed recently, because iridium meter prototypes are still used for fitting of interferometers results.

The changes in kilogram prototype seem to be consistent with this finding, although the "Shrinking Kilogram Mystery" can be the consequence of abrasion due the primitive and somewhat drastic "cleaning methods", especially the usage of hot vapor, followed by mechanical wiping (note that the poor etalon is even manipulated without gloves). Iridium-platinum alloy is soften, then the chrome plated steel - so I'm a bit surprised personally, the changes in kilogram prototype mass aren't just a much bigger.

When rigid body meter prototype is used, the light speed could slow down gradually, because of increasing vacuum density with compare to matter density. From historical observations follows, such possibility cannot still be excluded with certainty.

From implicate topology follows, every system of physical quantities will remain always inconsistent by definition - if it would be fully consistent, we could replace all quantities by single one. It means, the change in one constant will affect the others in unpredictable way from less or more distant perspective. Analogous situation exists in theories based on at least two mutually inconsistent postulates: if these postulates will be consistent, we could replace them by single one, thus obtaining a tautology. This means, no theory can remain universally valid, or it couldn't be falsified (compare the AWT approach to Goedel's theorems). Therefore the finding of universally invariant quantity corresponds the finding of generally valid TOE. By AWT such quantity in gradient driven reality could serve the quantity of change as defined by polyomino algebra.

sobota 13. června 2009

AWT and gravity

This post is motivated by recent NewScientist article Seven things that don't make sense about gravity. By AWT gravity is manifestation of shielding effect (supergravity), similar to Casimir force in 3D space. Massive objects are standing wave packets of energy, which spreads to their neighborhood in evanescent waves, which are making vacuum more dense. Because energy spreads more slowly in more dense environment, omnidirectional energy waves are retarded and shielded by this environment.

This model is consistent with Fatio-LeSage theory of gravitation, which remains after four hundred years the only theory capable to explain/predict the inverse square law, on which Bullialdus-Hooke-Newton's gravitational law and Einstein's field equations of general relativity are based (the potential energy field term and its gravitational constant are borrowed from gravitational law). Sailing boats at the undulating water surface are attracted together by the same mechanism.

Note that LeSage theory implies the existence of tachyons in form of "ultramundane universe particle flux" propagating in hidden dimensions, which is consistent with holographic principle.

The connection of gravity and omnidirectional universe expansion can be understood on background of general relativity and quantum mechanics theories duality, which is expressed in formal form by Maldacena's AdS/CFT correspondence and it manifests itself in most pronounced way of "vacuum catastrophe" in prediction of cosmological constant and density of vacuum, describing omnidirectional Universe expansion. Briefly speaking, quantum field theory observes particles and their gravitational lenses from exsintric (outer) perspective of flat space-time, so it considers the omnidirectional expansion of space-time as a collapse. By Schrodinger equation of quantum mechanics all wave packets of free particles would expand in speed of light, which is apparently unphysical solution. Such expansion is compensated by omnidirectional space-time collapse or by gravity field, which cannot be predicted/derived by using of quantum theory.

General relativity describes quantum wave packets and gravitational lenses from insintric perspective (where observer remains affected by gravity field) and it suffers the similar, just dual problem: it predicts the existence of black holes composed of gravitons and gravitational geons, composed of gravitational waves - but it cannot explain, why such object cannot collapse into singularity due their gravity. The concept of omnidirectional space-time expansion prohibits such collapse again. As we can see, the concept of omnidirectional expansion/collapse is closely linked into gravitational force in such a way, we can say, the gravitation is the acceleration force of omnidirectional universe expansion inside of gradient of vacuum density. By AWT omnidirectional universe expansion is an emergent dispersion phenomena, which we can experience inside of field of density fluctuations like during observation inside of fog or foam.

By using of particle model we can therefore predict/explain:
  1. Why strength of gravity is indirectly proportional to 2nd power of distance in 3D space-time and why gravity law becomes violated at the proximity toward higher dimensions (Casimir force operates in six dimensions and its indirectly proportional to fifth power of distance between spherical points, fourth power of distance between planparallel plates).
  2. Why speed of gravitational waves is inherently superluminal by the same way, like speed of underwater waves exceeds the speed of surface waves and why we cannot observe/detect gravitational waves by using of light directly, but by changes of cosmic microwave background noise intensity.

  3. Why the gravitational waves and force are so weak with comparison to electromagnetic waves/force by using of underwater/surface analogy again (the ratio of force constants of electromagnetic and gravitation (~10E+40) would correspond the ratio of speed of electromagnetic and gravitational waves propagation and the ratio of space-time expansion/compactification during inflation period)
  4. Why gravity is attractive force only in the world, where observable particles are of positive curvature only. In AWT the repulsing gravity is equivalent to pressure of radiation, energy field is an area of negative curvature (a "hole") of space. Inside of Lagrangian points the gravity field would become of repulsive character at least locally. Antimatter particles of negative surface curvature would exhibit an "antigravity" force at least partially.
  5. Why we cannot have a rigorous theory of quantum gravity. While general relativity and quantum theory are based on mutually reciprocal geometries and T-dual perspectives and formally inconsistent postulate set, we cannot expect an rigorously explicit and self-consistent theory based on quantum uncertainty. The string theory suffers the same conceptual problem, like quantum gravity and other quantum field theories.
  6. Why existence of life is related to presence of gravity. By AWT the last step of life evolution were tightly connected to gravitational force - not just to the electromagnetic forces and surface tension phenomena, which cannot enable the required degree of complexity and energy density of space-time events (i.e. mutations). It means, without gravity force (for example at the case of tiny planets in absence of tidal effects) the life could not evolve to the required degree of complexity so fast, if ever at all and organic life is not just adapted to gravity, but it even requires it for its formation and evolution.
  7. How we can reflect gravitational waves or shield gravitational force. In analogy to water surface, the longitudinal waves are reflected by density gradients composed of chaotically moving massive particles. By AWT such particles exists in superconductors due the compensation of repulsive forces of electrons under mutual pressure, which leads to delocalization of their quantum waves to macroscopic size, enabling shielding effect. When a gravitational wave at microwave frequencies impinges superconducting layer, the delocalization of the charge carriers causes them to undergo non-geodesic motion relative to the geodesic motion of the decohered holes in the superconductor lattice due the equivalence principle and charge separation. This excitation effect enhances the interaction of a gravitational wave with a superconductor relative to that of normal matter, so that the wave will be reflected from rotating superconducting film in gravitomagnetic analogy of Barnett Effect (1, 2).

    The gravitational shielding was observed first in Podkletnov's experiments above rotating superconductor disk and it was examined further by measuring of angular momentum by gravitometers and by fiber optic gyroscope signal (1, 2, 3) above rotating superconductors. From AWT follows, such shielding could hinder the formation of entangled states and "spooky action at distance" as well, thus increasing the stability and safety of quantum cryptography, for example.