Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: If Antigravity Devices Exist - What does this tell us about Gravity?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    224

    If Antigravity Devices Exist - What does this tell us about Gravity?

    Hello All ..

    I don't know if this is in the right forum ...it's not a theory ... more of a question but the question is assuming an against the mainstream device.

    Anyway ... feel free to move it ...

    My question is .... if there are such things as antigravity devices and propulsion ... would this tell us anything about gravity itself that science presently finds debatable?

    Thanks .....

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    4,813
    Show us a working model of this antigravity device and we'll see how to fit it into our theories of gravity. :wink:

    Edited to add:

    If such a device is actually demonstrated, you can bet that it will be mainstreamed IMMEDIATELY. You don't happen to be building such a device in your garage, by any chance?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    224
    [QUOTE=Celestial Mechanic;904786]Show us a working model of this antigravity device and we'll see how to fit it into our theories of gravity. :wink:

    I'm still working on it ... I'll let you know when I'm done ... but until then ...

    My question is ... what theories of gravity would antigravity devices substantiate or conversely disprove ...? Or would there be no contradiction with present ideas ...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    14,122
    well, it would depend on how it worked surely?
    Rules For Posting To This Board
    All Moderation in Purple

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    18,329
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric12407 View Post
    My question is ... what theories of gravity would antigravity devices substantiate or conversely disprove ...? Or would there be no contradiction with present ideas ...
    Who knows? How would we know? There's really not much that can be said without an actual "anti-gravity" device that can be tested.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    224
    Okay ... thanks for the replies

    So just the fact that gravity can be negated or suspended by these devices would not give us any clues as to the properties of gravity?

    I guess that would answer my question ....

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,641
    I think the trouble is that you're sort of going the wrong way. We need to determine how to deal with gravity before we could attempt to create such a device.

    If it shielded again extremely small particles then we would know that there seemed to be something to the Gravitron idea, whereas if it "unbent" space in the local area, we'd have more evidence for mass bending time/space. If it had to do something else entirely then that would help redirect ideas on gravity.

    Of course we'd have to look into whether it was really an anti-gravity device that truely reversed or shielded against gravity, or if it was merely a form of lifting device that created a force and opposed gravity, too.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    14,122
    I would thinkthat in order for it to work you would need to know how gravity worked in the first place! even if you discovered the effect by accident you would surely know what your device was doing. Unless you just happened to find it in the street all ready and working.
    Rules For Posting To This Board
    All Moderation in Purple

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    37

    Smile

    [QUOTE=Eric12407;904846]
    Quote Originally Posted by Celestial Mechanic View Post

    My question is ... what theories of gravity would antigravity devices substantiate or conversely disprove ...? Or would there be no contradiction with present ideas ...
    We habe been searching for a way to shield from gravity, and nothing found.
    Antigravity looks like going backward in time: it's not physical.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    8,774
    [QUOTE=Eric12407;904846]
    Quote Originally Posted by Celestial Mechanic View Post
    Show us a working model of this antigravity device and we'll see how to fit it into our theories of gravity. :wink:

    I'm still working on it ... I'll let you know when I'm done ... but until then ...

    My question is ... what theories of gravity would antigravity devices substantiate or conversely disprove ...? Or would there be no contradiction with present ideas ...
    It would substantiate the notion that an attractive gravity is essential to the existence of beings capable of wondering about gravity.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    4,813
    Please note: due to some fumbling with quotes in the previous two posts I am quoted as writing something that I did not. The only thing that I did write was "Show us a working model of this antigravity device and we'll see how to fit it into our theories of gravity. :wink:
    "

    On a more pleasant note, may I rephrase the question of the original post?

    If unicorns exist -- what does this tell us about Magick?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    12,185
    Hmm...I think this is the reason why anyone claiming to be building an anti-gravity whats-a-ma-jigger is so easy to disprove.

    The chances of "stumbling upon" anti-gravity are relatively small. Sure breakthroughs in science have been made by accident in the past, but the chances aren't good.

    In otherwords, to build an antigravity device, we would have to know what property of gravity we're going to exploit in advance. So I dont think an anti-grav device will cause a change in theory, altho a change in theory might lead to an anti-grav device...if that makes sense.

    edited for, well funness...if that's a word:
    If unicorns exist -- what does this tell us about Magick?
    It tells us that you're about as good at spelling as I am.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    339
    At the moment it would seem its easier to build one accidentally, than actually design one

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ocean Shores, Wa
    Posts
    5,646
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric12407 View Post
    Okay ... thanks for the replies

    So just the fact that gravity can be negated or suspended by these devices would not give us any clues as to the properties of gravity?

    I guess that would answer my question ....
    Actually, antigravity devices do exist: Elevators, escalators, even the framework of a building: We know how to counteract - use electromagnetic forces against gravity indirectly, even if current theory does not provide us with a clue as to how to construct a device that acts directly upon gravity...it is a force we can act against; negate if you will, but not suspend.
    “It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.” ― Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    339
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Actually, antigravity devices do exist: Elevators, escalators, even the framework of a building: We know how to counteract - use electromagnetic forces against gravity indirectly, even if current theory does not provide us with a clue as to how to construct a device that acts directly upon gravity...it is a force we can act against; negate if you will, but not suspend.
    I wouldnt count such devices as "anti-gravity" since all those apply a force to match and overcome gravity, thus all those devides work in all directions just the same, not just against gravity.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    3,779
    I interpretted the question as referring to the ideas of Ning Li and Evgeny Podkletnov, the only people I know of to assert that such a thing is really possible. That gives us a specific theoretical basis for the technology, not just a miracle being stumbled upon with no explanation. So we could discuss those particular concepts and what it would mean if they're right and it works, even if we were to end up concluding that they're wrong and it wouldn't work...

    The idea is that a "gravity-like" or "gravitomagnetic" force would be generating by the very rapid spinning of a Bose-Einstein condensate (or at least the particles within one). "Gravitomagnetic" in this case doesn't mean a hybrid force between gravity and magnetism, but an effect that's based on gravity in the same way that magnetism is based on electricity: you start with particles that would have a small effect individually (the charge of an electron for electricity, the mass of any matter particle for gravity) and create a large-scale effect from high-speed motion and relativity. This would be comparable to frame-dragging (and possibly to the general concept of matter increasing in mass, and thus in its gravitational effects, as it approaches light speed), substituting the high mass and low rotation rate of planets and stars for the low mass and high rotation rate of the device.

    It THAT were to work, it would mean that gravity, like electrical charges, can indeed be made to shift the scale it normally works on. (Electrical charges normally attract and repel on a subatomic level, but magnetism makes macroscopic objects do so; gravity normally only matters between large masses, but this would make small ones do so as well.) However, since it's really based on the motion of masses, this kind of gravity machine would not give us any direct connection between gravity and electromagnetism, even if the spin that makes it work were introduced electromagnetically. The similarity to electricity and magnetism would just be an analogy, but the two forces of gravity and electromagnetism would still be as separate as they are now. So it wouldn't give us anything near a unified field theory such as some other hypothetical kinds of gravity devices might be based on (manipulation of one kind of "force" field with another).

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    9,031
    Shoot -- think outside the box. All you need is negative mass. Only problem there is the negative mass tends to follow the geodesics of the positive mass it is cancelling out, so you'd have to lift it via normal means with you..........

    Then, big time gravitomagnetic induction -- gravitational equivalent of Faraday's Law. Tajmar and DeMattos' enhanced superconducting B_g along with Ron Mallet's ring laser time travel device (supposed to greatly amplify B_g/frame dragging effects) could be put to good use here.

    But there too, we have the problem of needing to move the device. If you manage to cancel out the earth's g in a region in the lab, you've got to be able to move that region to be able to float anything off the the earth.

    With electric generators, we have these nice things called conductors that serve as waveguides to carry out any internal fields we generate in generators.

    We'd need some gravitational conductor/waveguide. And that would involve negative mass as well. Not to mention a lot of other strange things.

    -Richard

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    11,505
    It would be nice to have. With a little effort, I can defeat gravity and raise a rock up with muscle action. With a mass driver--I can use coils and impart kinetic energy to an object--indirectly. How nice it would be to transfer it directly. To idle to orbit and not to have rockets anymore.

    Too good to be true.

    I for one am glad the free energy types are wrong. If nature were that forthcoming with energy--forget about testing an A-bomb--I'd be scared to light a match!

    Nature is free with energy only at the highest and lowest scales. For good energy density at our level--its still hydrocarbons.

    Sigh.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,297
    What about the humble Quantum Nucleonic Reactor?

Similar Threads

  1. Does Gravity Exist?????
    By dramafreak32607 in forum Space/Astronomy Questions and Answers
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 2008-Feb-13, 06:16 PM
  2. Replies: 60
    Last Post: 2006-Jul-04, 01:25 AM
  3. anti-gravity devices and free energy???
    By N C More in forum Against the Mainstream
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 2004-Nov-30, 09:29 AM
  4. Free Energy and antigravity devices
    By Demigrog in forum Against the Mainstream
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 2004-Feb-10, 09:29 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •