The operational meaning of a length or time quantum involves a symmetry transformation in which these respective variables, measured with rods and clocks in general relativity, would acquire entirely novel characteristics, in this conjectured field. The length quanta might more properly be called a spatial quanta. Spatial quanta would occur in opposite polarities - one of which would induce localized expansion of the metric, while the other would induce contraction of the metric. It's assumed these particles have masses in the supersymmetry range, so that their fields are correspondingly restricted in range to something less than 10^-16 centimeter. Spatial expansion would still be concievable within such a confined range by invoking a metric geometry similar to the Alcubierre-Broeck micro-warp. Since contraction for such a small region would quickly lead to a dimensionless point, in order to preserve the dynamic symmetry of this Maxwell length-time field, its assumed that the contraction quanta induces a spatial expansion into one, or more, of the large-scale dimensions posited by Arkani-Hamed and colleagues. The current limit on the size of these dimensions, based on experiment, is about .2 millimeter.

The temporal quanta would also exist in two polarities - one of which would locally speed up the rate at which events transpire, while the other would slow the rate at which events transpire. But this alteration of clock rates would attain truely astonishing amplitudes; namely 39 magnitudes greater than what is obtained through the energy-momentum tensor in general relativity. And, again, the range of this quanta's field would be less than 10^-16 centimeter.

The 'photon' for the proposed length-time (L-T) Maxwell field would behave similarly to the electromagnetic photon, except that the range of its length and time field components would be restricted to ~ 10^-16 centimeters. A fixed observer monitoring the passage of an electromagnetic wave, with appropriate instruments, would note a periodic rise and fall in the amplitude of the electric and magnetic components of this wave. Neglecting, for the moment, the finite range of the L-T field, the passage of an L-T wave would result in alternating expansions and contractions of the metric of very large amplitude, for a fixed observer. However, an observer entrained at a maxima node of such a wave would be continously preceded by a region of contracting spacetime, and trailed by a region of expanding spacetime - the precise recipe for an Alcubierre warp metric. Assuming every massive particle (electron, quark, etc.) harbors one, or more, virtual L-T photons near its core, it would result in the host particle being enveloped in a short range Alcubierre warp 'bubble'. If the amplitude and direction of the L-T photon's warp field synchronizes with the acceleration forces experienced by electrons in elliptical orbit about their nucleii, it would nullify acceleration moments, and thus account for stable non-radiating atomic orbits.

The very large magnitude of metric expansions and contractions induced by the L-T quanta must inevitably result in a desynchronization of clocks between fundamental particles. An external observer would perceive every fundamental particle to fluctuate forward and backward in time at deBroglie frequencies. Clearly, for the electron to remain in orbit, about its nucleus, it must always 'feel' the positive electric charge of the nucleus. For this condition to be satisfied, in the case of the hydrogen atom, the deBroglie wave of the orbiting electron would have to synchronize with the deBroglie wave of the proton nucleus. But a proton is about 1800 times as massive as an electron, with a correspondingly shorter deBroglie wavelength. However, a proton consists of two up quarks, and one down quark. The mass difference between an up quark and down quark is not known with great certainty, but is known to be very small. Assuming this difference is about 1 part in 1800, the beat deBroglie frequencies between the constituent quarks of a proton would provide the necessary deBroglie wavelength in the hydrogen atom nucleus to match and synchronize with the deBroglie wave of the orbiting electrons.

Since the time of Heaviside (1893), to modern times, it has been theorized that a gravitational analogue to electromagnetism must exist. The calculated strength of this field, for the spinning Earth, is vanishingly small, and its confirmation by Gravity Probe B is currently underway (data analysis has been extended to the end of 2007). This field goes by the moniker gravitoelectromagnetism (GEM), with gravitoelectric (GE), and gravitomagnetic (GM) components. The GE part is simply ordinary gravity, while the GM part arises from the motion of matter, or "mass currents". Formally, the GE and GM fields are expressed in terms of mass (M), length (L), and time (T). The GE field is defined as acceleration - L/T² - due to the presence of mass - M. The GM field is defined as mass current per unit length, or - M/LT. GE 'charge' is just ordinary mass - M, while GM charge is defined as velocity times a unit of length, or L²/T. M, L, and T are usually defined in the MKS system.

Thus, unlike any other known field (and the electromagnetic field, in particular), the GEM field (GE and GM fields and sources) are computed, and derived, from compound parameters. Is nature really this cumbersome and unwieldy? Treating mass as 'charge', and then assuming the laws of electromagnetic induction (in a gravitational sense) apply, seems crude at best. Supposedly, analysis of 10 years of data from the pair of Laegos satellites has confirmed the gravitomagnetic effect of the spinning Earth to the 10% level. It is claimed that a few nanometers out of a total of 2 meters displacement in the orbits of the Laegos satellites, in the direction of the Earth's spin, during this period results from the influence of the Earth's gravitomagnetic field. But, skeptics are unconvinced, since the bulk of the displacement originates from inhomogenities in the Earth's gravity field, due to mountain ranges and deep sea trenches, and it is felt that this contribution is not characterized sufficiently to conclude that the Earth's GM field has been detected.

A recent series of experiments, involving a rapidly spun up niobium superconductor, detected acceleration forces 1000 billion, billion, billion times larger than predicted by General Relativity, for the strength of the gravitoelectric field. While this acceleration field was attributed to the long-predicted gravitoelectric field, it's worth noting that superconductors massively amplify wavelike phenomena, normally only significant at the particle, or atomic/molecular scale. Matter waves have been a key part of our understanding of atomic processes, since Louis deBroglie predicted them in 1923. An integral number of matter wavelength's must wrap around an electron's orbital circumference for stability to be realized, while Schrodinger's wave equation provides the statistical likelyhood of finding the electron at a particular point in 3D space around the nucleus. However, neither of these long established facts gives any insight into what a matter wave is, or why an electron, in phase with its matter wave, becomes immunized to the consequences of angular accelerations exceeding 10²² g's.

The first person to claim anomalous acceleration effects from superconductors, Evgeny Podkletnov, was long ago discredited, since major labs, like NASA, were unable to demonstrate the effect. In their 2001 AIAA paper "Exploration of Anomalous Gravity Effects by Magnetized High-T_c Superconducting Oxides", Glen Robertson and Ron Litchfield of NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, report inconclusive results, since irradiation of the YBCO disc led to an upward climb in the data. The maximum shielding Podkletnov allegedly produced, resulted from spinning his YBCO superconductor at high rpm, while irradiating it with microwaves. Less well known is that he also reported brief shielding effects, during the transition through the critical temperature. In 1999, Harald Reiss, then working for ABB in Germany noted a momentary increase in the weight of superconducting pellets during the transition to the non-superconducting state. At the height of interest in gravity shielding from superconductors, several amateurs also reported acceleration pulses during transitions between non-superconducting and superconducting states.

While accidental discoverers and amateurs might be dismissed as being unreliable, such is not the case for a research team led by Martin Tajmar at the Austrian Research Center (ARC), in Siebersdorf, Austria. After three years of intensive work, and hundreds of experimental runs, the ARC group published their results in March of 2006 in a paper titled "Experimental Detection of the Gravitomagnetic London Moment". They found that by spinning up a niobium ring, 14.4 cm. in diameter, while in the superconductive state, that an acceleration field, opposing the tangential acceleration applied to the ring was detected. This acceleration signal was proposed to be a gravitoelectric (GE) field induced by a changing gravitomagnetic (GM) field, as the ring was spun up from zero to 4500 RPM. Remarkably, this GE field was 30 magnitudes larger than allowed by General Relativity. Previous to their experimental work they postulated the existence of a massive graviton to explain a discrepancy in the mass of cooper pairs reported by Janet Tate in 1989. Such a graviton would enhance the GM and GE fields to detectable levels in superconductors like niobium, with 20 times the cooper pair density as the high temperature ceramic types, thus accounting for the anomalously large signal.

The March paper was augmented by an October release: "Measurement of Gravitomagnetic and Acceleration Fields Around Rotating Superconductors", which reported results from laser gyros intended to detect the GM field directly. The GM field should be proportional to the rotational velocity of the niobium ring, as opposed to accleration required to generate the GE field. What's puzzling about this effort is that the researchers were apparently unable to perform the experiment for a prolonged period at a temperature low enough to maintain the desired cooper pair density. The laser gyro measurements were made over a period of less than 2 seconds. The amplitude of the GM signal tracks the acceleration-deceleration of the superconductor, just like the GE field.

The paper claims that the absense of a non changing GM signal is due to a rise, then fall, in temperature as the superconductor winds up/slows down, resulting in a corresponding increase/decrease in cooper pair density. One wonders why they couldn't pump more helium refrigerant through the system so that a run of several minutes, or longer, could be achieved with a suitable cooper pair density? This would provide unabiguous proof of the existence of a GM field. See: Gravitoelectromagnetism - A Nonexistent Field? Not reported in their formal papers was that they also picked up an acceleration pulse during transition into the superconducting state. In the April 7th, 2007 edition of New Scientist, Clovis de Matos, the principle theorist on the ARC team, stated "We measured an acceleration even though the ring's motion hadn't changed at all", referring to the moment the uniformly spinning ring achieved superconductivity. The non-inclusion of this detail was, no doubt, prompted by the desire to avoid being tainted by association with earlier work by Podkletnov, and others.

A common thread runs through all these experiments with superconductors - the detection of an acceleration pulse during the transition into, or out of, superconductivity, when the superconductor becomes non-linear. In the opinion of this investigator, what is being detected during this interval is a tiny residual of a fundamental field of nature - namely a field constituting the essence of matter waves. This proposed field provides a unifying explanation for all cases of anomalously large acceleration forces from superconductors, subjected to disparate conditions. Matter waves underlie the stability of atoms. For an electron's orbit to be stable, an integral number of the electron's matter wavelengths must wrap around the circumference of the orbit. Somehow this arrangement neutralizes the effect of acceleration forces in excess of 10²² g's, preventing synchroton radiation, and consequent collapse of the atom. These facts are not emphasized in physics textbooks, leading to the impression that it is a completely resolved issue. The reason may be that long ago the wave equation for an electron's orbit (3 dimensional description of its matter wave) was shown to conform to a statistical interpretation. Further muddying the waters is the principle of complementarity, wherein an electron in orbit is treated not as a point particle, but a 3D wave, obviating the need to concern oneself with angular acceleration forces that a physical particle would be subjected to.

The explanation for the dual wave/particle nature of electrons, and other particles, may lie in an extremely short range, di-pole gravitational force that counteracts the angular acceleration the electron experiences. Why would such a force impart a wavelike behavior to a fundamental particle? For starters it would need to be at least as strong as the electromagnetic field, or 39 magnitudes larger than Newtonian gravity to counter the electrostatic attraction between an orbiting electron and its nucleus. Such an astronomically intense di-pole gravity force would have astronomical effects on space and time, albeit confined to a small radius. If we assume this force's amplitude is non-constant, the curvature of the metric within its operational radius would be astronomical, alternating between positive and negative. This, in turn, would induce titanic syncronization shifts, so that every particle would see every other particle oscillating between the past and future. As such, its position in both space and time would become uncertain, and thus statistical. Why short range? Because, if such a force were long range (e.g. of the order of an atom's width - 10^-8 cm.), it would affect the electron's orbital parameters. Then how could such a force be detected over macroscopic distances? The answer may be as simple as it is elegant. Theorists, for some time, have been prediciting the existance of extra spatial dimensions (or bulk) beyond our 3+1 "brane", on which the gauge forces of the Standard Model are confined. Only the closed loop graviton is allowed to move between the lower and higher dimensional spaces. If the proposed di-pole gravitational force mediates the flow of these massless gravitons across the bulk/brane boundary, the detection of this postulated force over long ranges would be explained. Hereafter, this proposed field will be identified as the LT field, since its component variables are Length and Time. See: Quantums of Length and Time

In July 2007 a new paper was published by researchers at the Austrian Research Center, detailing results of their attempt to measure the gravitomagnetic field directly with gyroscopes: "Search for Frame-Dragging in the Vicinity of Spinning Superconductors". They assumed that the acceleration field they detected earlier, when a niobium superconductor was rapidly spun up from 0 to 4500 RPM, was a gravitoelectric (GE) field induced by a time-varying gravitomagnetic (GM) field. So, the next logical step was to detect the GM field directly to verify the GM/GE hypothesis. The concept is that a GM field would impart a small torque to the four gyroscopes, strategically positioned at various distances above the spinning niobium ring. The results obtained were puzzling, and did not support the presence of a GM field with the magnitude and configuration originally concieved. To start with, the torque on the gyroscopes was only 1% of what was expected, based on the strength of the acceleration fields they detected earlier. Additionally, the reference gyroscope furthest above the spinning niobium ring registered the strongest signal, thus not conforming to an inverse square law that was expected from a GM field. The two lower gyros detected slightly weaker signals. Curiously, this result is reminiscent of Podkletnov's experiments with superconductors, where an acceleration field maintained a constant strength, regardless of distance above his spinning YBCO superconductor. Perhaps an acceleration field can affect gyroscopes also.