The Thomas Townsend Brown Family Website

June 1, 1973

Mr. T. Townsend Brown
P.O. Box 1565
Avalon, California
90704

Dear Mr. Brown,

Thank you for your letter of 20 June. We found your personal description of the experiment quite fascinating, and we have discussed it among ourselves here subsequent to your visit.

Per your request I enclose copies of several papers, including most of the J. Weber's published reports. I have also included a recent review of the experimental situation which appeared in Physics Today.

As far as my own thinking about your experiment goes, I would make the following comments:

I share your feelings that the most interesting part of the work is the apparent correlation with astronomical events. Nevertheless, I think it is important in the first instance to understand more fully the precise mechanism by with the deflection is produced. From your description, especially the fact that the oil must be slightly conductive, it seems very likely that that a very complicated configuration of currents and fields is set up in the apparatus. One might guess that the deflection is primarily a magnetic effect from these currents. (Do you know how much current was drawn from the power supply during its "on" period?)

My feeling is that before a serious study of astronomical correlations can proceed, the effects should be brought to a point that it is reproducible with the least complicated apparatus possible so that it can be determined just which electromagnetic effects play a role. This presumably would allow a more sensitive apparatus to be built, optimizing those effects which are important and deleting parts which are irrelevant to the effect. I think you will have a difficult time convincing the astrophysical community that the effects are real, unless the operation of the basic apparatus is well-understood.

Another suggestions regards your 1937 data: with modern computers, it should be possible to do a thorough statistical analysis of that data at a fairly moderate cost. A very rough guess is that the hourly "raw" data could be keypunched onto IBM cards for $100, and that an analysis might use several hundred dolars worth of machine time. For example, it would be interesting to see a Fourier spectrum of the data on all periods from hours to months - this would indicate whether the time correlations that you found are the strongest ones, or whether there are others which have escaped attention thus far.

Regarding your suggestion that the Foundation might be interested in supporting some investigation of the effect of by a Caltech student, I think this work could be interesting and useful experience for a bright, advanced undergraduate, e.g. as a summer job or as a part time research project during an interesting summer's employment for a competent student (it could also be done commercially, of course). Actual design and building of apparatus would be another possibility; here it would first be necessary to establish goals for the experiment in some detail.

It is probably not feasable at this stage to have a post-graduate student to work on the effect, because its suitability as a thesis research topic might not become evident until late in the game.

Let me know if you would like me to look into administrative details of how how undergraduate research here might be supported (e.g. by research grant, restricted gift, etc.). Since the faculty and administration here take considerable interest in undergraduate education, it is possible that special arrangements such as low-cost computer time, etc., might be arranged. I do feel that any arrangements should be made through CalTech, so that a student would have the benefit of faculty guidance (e.g. that of Prof. T. or myself) in any work undertaken. In any case, I am interested in knowing how you proceed, and I would be happy to make any further suggestions that you might find useful.

Regards,

William P.
Asst. Professor of Physics