THE ZTNEROL EXPANSION

                     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.

 -------------------