Enter the content which will be displayed in sticky bar
Christian Sutterlin
local time: 2023-05-31 11:32 (+01:00 )
Christian Sutterlin (Abstracts)
Titles Abstracts Details
  • Electron beams magnetic field is not a result of electron motion but of their intrinsic magnetic moment (2014) [Updated 9 years ago]
    by Christian Sutterlin   read the paper:

    This paper proposes
    an experiment intended for showing that the magnetic field of electrons is not
    the result of their translation, but of their magnetic moment. The magnetic
    moments of electrons are aligned in the metal cathode until the electrons are
    ejected towards the anode, and then they pass through the hole provided for
    this purpose to form a cathodic beam. Electric fields do not change the
    orientation of the magnetic moments of the electrons. If this beam is deflected
    up to 90 ? by an electric field, the magnetic moments of electrons are no longer
    parallel to their direction of translation, thus the magnetic field of the
    cathodic beam should disappear or at least no longer be measured by coils
    placed in a plane containing the beam, unlike what can be observed before







  • The "multiple photon", an alternative to the single particle photon. (2012) [Updated 1 decade ago]
    by Christian Sutterlin   read the paper:

    Particle and wave natures of the photon allow for explaining quite simply almost all phenomena related to electromagnetic waves. The situation was changed with quantum entanglement. However, a very recent experience seems to show a tendency to return to the model of the pilot wave of Boehm-Broglie. The purpose of this note is to show that the replacement of the particle photon by a set of particles  could make everything simpler. Unlike a single particle, a set of homokinetic particles can be divided.

  • Some comments about Mr Einstein first 1905 paper : ?Concerning an Heuristic Point of View Toward the Emission and Transformation of Light?. (2012) [Updated 1 decade ago]
    by Christian Sutterlin   read the paper:

    There are two major
    inconsistencies linked to that first 1905 Mr Einstein paper.
    The first is related to the force binding electrons
    increasing with their respective distance. The second inconsistency is related
    to the discrete nature of phenomena

  • The Stacy McGaugh Law: The Link Between Galaxies, Rotation Speed Link and Visible Mass (2011) [Updated 1 decade ago]

    Galaxies do not rotate in accordance with general relativity, nor indeed with the law of Newton. The gas and stars in galaxies rotate at constant speed. Worse, their speed exceeds that which can be calculate from the visible mass of galaxies. Relativists have therefore invented the invisible dark matter also called missing mass. This matter must be evenly distributed in galaxies. This phenomenon had already been found in fact for the relative motion of pairs of galaxies. At no time, the relativists have accepted this fact could question their doctrine.

    Unfortunately, in 1977, astronomers discovered that the visible mass of galaxies varies with the fourth power of the rotation speed of stars. This relation between the speed of stars and the mass of their galaxy is enforcing a direct link between the visible mass and the black mass of galaxies. This result was named after the astronomer who has highlighted the most numerous and the most significant cases. It is the law of Stacy McGaugh, indeed already noticed by Tully and Fisher in 1977. This link between dark matter and visible mass is entirely contrary to the theory of General Relativity. The tragedy is that many experiments designed to highlight the famous black mass since the middle of last century have failed.

  • Gravity Probe B Experiment: A Failure? (2009) [Updated 6 years ago]

    Gravity Probe B experiment results finally seem to confirm the Frame-Dragging effect of GRT after several corrections of the measured values. These results are they undoubtful? They cover only 2 months. Unfortunately those two months are going from end December to end February when the distance from the Earth to the Sun is steadily increasing so that the differential effect of the Sun on Probe B satellite is decreasing exactly like the curves given within the experiment final report. It would have been so nice to cover a period from the 15th November  to the 15th February so that the effect of the Sun could have been clearly eliminated!

    But there is even worse:

    They show also a periodical effect clearly demonstrated by all of the four gyros curves (please note that the scales of the curves given in the final report  are not all the same). The periodicity is approximately 4 per month. This is the double of the tidal effect (two maxima per month). The only such periodicity equal to 4 per month is the nul value of the tidal curve derivation. The maxima occur the very same day for all four curves of course.

    The most amazing feature is that one on two of all the four Probe B frame-dragging effect curves maxima occurs exactly at the date of highest tides.

    Those highest tides occured on the (dd/mm/yyyy)


    (This is the days in Brest FRA but they are the same everywhere of course because they are linked to the relative positions of the Sun, the Moon and the Earth)

    Now why is there an additional maximum of all four curves in between highest tides day?

    All these problems make the results of this experiment highly questionable! The most interesting is that they are fully in line with Prof. Allais findings both with his paraconic pendulum and with his analysis of Miller measurements with MMI.

  • Electron beams magnetic field (2000) [Updated 9 years ago]
    by Christian Sutterlin   read the paper:

    The associated engineers established that the
    cathodic beam electrons might have a motion of translation without having any
    magnetic field.

    For each direction of measurements, at a given
    time, the magnetic field exists only in one way but not in the opposite way.

    Whatever is the root cause of the cancellation
    of the magnetic field, this report establishes that the magnetic field of
    electrons can, in no way, be a result of their motion of translation.