-
NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
anti gravity propulsion, why so interesting?
- Thread starter the_great_attractor
- Start date
Free episodes:
Yet just when it seemed the engineers were running out of ideas, it was theoretical physics which threw them a lifeline.
Recently it was discovered that the universe was not just expanding, but accelerating in its expansion, and suddenly the theorists had some explaining to do. According to Dr Tamara Davis from Queensland University: "Something's accelerating the galaxies away from each other. Gravity appears to be 'pushing'."
Some theorists are now breaking ranks to offer radical explanations, among them Dr Dragan Hajdukovic at Cern, who has developed a theory that gravitational polarity does exist. He says: "So far, we believe that gravity's only a force of attraction. It may be that gravity can also be a force of repulsion but not between matter and matter but between matter and anti-matter."
It's a theory Cern is gearing up to test next year. If Hajdukovic can show that anti-matter particles fall "upwards", he not only opens the way to some form of demonstrable anti-gravity on earth, he almost certainly wins a Nobel prize into the bargain.
The experiments and the debates continue. Meanwhile, Boeing has apparently licensed its own version of the EmDrive and the Pentagon has shown a keen interest.
Project Greenglow and the battle with gravity - BBC News
Recently it was discovered that the universe was not just expanding, but accelerating in its expansion, and suddenly the theorists had some explaining to do. According to Dr Tamara Davis from Queensland University: "Something's accelerating the galaxies away from each other. Gravity appears to be 'pushing'."
Some theorists are now breaking ranks to offer radical explanations, among them Dr Dragan Hajdukovic at Cern, who has developed a theory that gravitational polarity does exist. He says: "So far, we believe that gravity's only a force of attraction. It may be that gravity can also be a force of repulsion but not between matter and matter but between matter and anti-matter."
It's a theory Cern is gearing up to test next year. If Hajdukovic can show that anti-matter particles fall "upwards", he not only opens the way to some form of demonstrable anti-gravity on earth, he almost certainly wins a Nobel prize into the bargain.
The experiments and the debates continue. Meanwhile, Boeing has apparently licensed its own version of the EmDrive and the Pentagon has shown a keen interest.
Project Greenglow and the battle with gravity - BBC News
But the controversy attracted the attention of China's Yang Juan, professor of propulsion theory and engineering of aeronautics and astronautics at the Northwestern Polytechnic University in Xian. Her team set out to explore the EmDrive independently. A 2008 theory paper by Yang and colleagues describes the EmDrive in terms of quantum theory and indicates net thrust is possible. A 2010 follow-up paper calculates a possible thrust of 456 mN from a 1-kw input, and states that the team was getting positive experimental results.
The latest paper, “Net Thrust Measurement of Propellentless Microwave Thruster,” is in the June edition of the journal Acta Physica Sinica published by the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Yang's team used a magnetron as a 2.45 GHz microwave source and produced a measured thrust of up to 720 mN from 2.5 kw of input power. On the surface, this appears to be a peer-reviewed validation of the science.
Propellentless Space Propulsion Research Continues
China says it is testing an 'impossible' new form of space propulsion on a satellite
Chinese boffins: We're testing an 'impossible' EM Drive IN SPAAAACE
Now there is still no proof they are doing this, Or that it even works, But experiments continue. As one pundit poetically put it. The best way to guarantee you don't win the lottery is to not buy a ticket.
Rumours The US Military Is Testing an EM Drive on The X-37B Space Plane Just Won't Die
The latest paper, “Net Thrust Measurement of Propellentless Microwave Thruster,” is in the June edition of the journal Acta Physica Sinica published by the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Yang's team used a magnetron as a 2.45 GHz microwave source and produced a measured thrust of up to 720 mN from 2.5 kw of input power. On the surface, this appears to be a peer-reviewed validation of the science.
Propellentless Space Propulsion Research Continues
China says it is testing an 'impossible' new form of space propulsion on a satellite
Chinese boffins: We're testing an 'impossible' EM Drive IN SPAAAACE
Now there is still no proof they are doing this, Or that it even works, But experiments continue. As one pundit poetically put it. The best way to guarantee you don't win the lottery is to not buy a ticket.
Rumours The US Military Is Testing an EM Drive on The X-37B Space Plane Just Won't Die
After months of speculation and leaked documents, NASA's long-awaited EM Drive paper has finally been peer-reviewed and published. And it shows that the 'impossible' propulsion system really does appear to work.
The NASA Eagleworks Laboratory team even put forward a hypothesis for how the EM Drive could produce thrust – something that seems impossible according to our current understanding of the laws of physics.
The new peer-reviewed paper is titled "Measurement of Impulsive Thrust from a Closed Radio-Frequency Cavity in Vacuum", and has been published online as an open access 'article in advance' in the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA)’s Journal of Propulsion and Power. It'll appear in the December print edition.
It's very similar to the paper that was leaked online earlier this month and, most notably, shows that the drive does indeed produce 1.2 millinewtons per kilowatt of thrust in a vacuum:
This is the first peer-reviewed research ever published on the EM Drive, which firmly takes it out of the realm of pseudoscience into a technology that's worth taking skeptically, but seriously.
It's Official: NASA's Peer-Reviewed EM Drive Paper Has Finally Been Published
The NASA Eagleworks Laboratory team even put forward a hypothesis for how the EM Drive could produce thrust – something that seems impossible according to our current understanding of the laws of physics.
The new peer-reviewed paper is titled "Measurement of Impulsive Thrust from a Closed Radio-Frequency Cavity in Vacuum", and has been published online as an open access 'article in advance' in the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA)’s Journal of Propulsion and Power. It'll appear in the December print edition.
It's very similar to the paper that was leaked online earlier this month and, most notably, shows that the drive does indeed produce 1.2 millinewtons per kilowatt of thrust in a vacuum:
This is the first peer-reviewed research ever published on the EM Drive, which firmly takes it out of the realm of pseudoscience into a technology that's worth taking skeptically, but seriously.
It's Official: NASA's Peer-Reviewed EM Drive Paper Has Finally Been Published
ALPHA ROMEO UNIFORM
Whittingham
Mike,
There was a former high command officer who worked for NATO on some type of anti-gravity system in early 1970s-80 who said they were fifty years ahead. So not all surprised they cracked it decades ago.
There was a former high command officer who worked for NATO on some type of anti-gravity system in early 1970s-80 who said they were fifty years ahead. So not all surprised they cracked it decades ago.
If true perhaps the black holes at the centre of each galaxy could be used as a trampoline cannon.
You dive down into the black hole on a vector that will shoot you in the direction of the next galaxy you want to visit. The deeper you go before you switch on the repulsor field the faster it spits you out in the direction you want to go.
'Antigravity' Propulsion System Proposed
"Based on this research, I expect a mission to accelerate a massive payload to a 'good fraction of light speed' will be launched before the end of this century," said Dr. Felber. "These antigravity solutions of Einstein's theory can change our view of our ability to travel to the far reaches of our universe."
More immediately, Felber's new solution can be used to test Einstein's theory of gravity at low cost in a storage-ring laboratory facility by detecting antigravity in the unexplored regime of near-speed-of-light velocities.
During his 30-year career, Dr. Felber has led physics research and development programs for the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, the Department of Energy and Department of Transportation, the National Institute of Justice, National Institutes of Health, and national laboratories. Dr. Felber is Vice President and Co-founder of Starmark.
Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2006-02-physicist-exact-solution-einstein-gravitational.html#jCp
Last edited by a moderator:
And that plays nicely into the breakaway civilization theory s that are part and parcel of this genre.
That's one reason you wouldn't share such a discovery with the world in general.
The other is AG and free energy would collapse the worlds economy's.
Imagine wiping all the jobs that go with the oil industry, the automotive industry, the roads industry and the poles and wires power industry from society overnight.
It would be kinder to nuke us all..............
marduk
quelling chaos since 2352BC
The breakaway civilization idea makes for good fiction but makes for very poor real world thinking.
Rulers like to rule.
If we had significant assets in space including humans, we would know it.
If we had working AG, we'd know it.
Why?
Because telescopes and the old maxim: 'a weapon unused is a useless weapon.'
Rulers like to rule.
If we had significant assets in space including humans, we would know it.
If we had working AG, we'd know it.
Why?
Because telescopes and the old maxim: 'a weapon unused is a useless weapon.'
Yes but what if you could do both ?. Rule here and have a pristine world of your own to escape the hustle and bustle.
Why Do Rich People Feel the Need to Own Islands?
While I'm not saying its happening, I can see the motivations behind doing so if you had the means.
The Nazi bell narrative for example, again not saying its real or likely, But if it were it would fit with the ideology that drove them and having lost the war here on earth to simply set up their vision of the perfect society elsewhere if they could.
The seeming lemming like attitude to our looming environmental disaster here on earth also fits that narrative. Why bother trying to fix the difficult to fix if its easier to just walk away and start again elsewhere.
I think given the means , motive and opportunity a small select group would happily breakaway.
Thomas R Morrison
Paranormal Adept
It’s nice to see someone else following this subject as maniacally as I do, haha. But you’ve posted way too many topics to address them all in any detail, so let’s focus on the most exciting stuff and we can circle back to the other items if you want to get into them more deeply.
This is amazing work, so a brief synopsis is in order.
Dragan Hajdukovic considered a very simple and tantalizing question: what are the cosmological ramifications if antimatter possesses an opposite gravitational charge than matter possesses? It’s not even a radical idea: antimatter possesses opposite electrical charge to its matter counterparts, opposite baryon/lepton number, and opposite spin…so it’s not really a stretch to wonder if antimatter possesses an opposite gravitational charge.
And we still don’t know which direction antimatter falls in a gravitational field. We assume that it will fall down, because it has the same inertial mass as its matter counterparts, but we have no empirical basis for that assumption. So three teams at CERN; the AEgIS, ATHENA and GBAR collaborations, are all working on experiments to determine the gravitational interaction of antimatter in the Earth’s gravity field. It will probably be a couple of years or more before we know – I’ve been waiting on this result for at least a decade, and every year they say “next year, or maybe two years, tops.”
It would be cool if antimatter falls up, but that’s not actually the exciting part. Hajdukovic takes the next step and asks: if antimatter falls up, then the quantum vacuum fluctuation fields, represented as virtual particle and antiparticles pairs, must inherently possess a gravitational dipole moment – so how would this effect our cosmological observations?
The notion pertains to the gravitational polarizability of the vacuum – around massive bodies, the quantum vacuum fluctuations of empty space would rotate briefly: the positive gravitational charge of the virtual particles would be attracted to the positive gravitational charge of matter, and the antimatter aspect of the virtual particle pair would be repelled, for a brief instant before they self-annihilate. And because these virtual particle pairs are ubiquitous throughout spacetime, this polarization effect adds up to yield observable consequences.
Hajdukovic found that large bodies of matter, like galaxies and galaxy clusters, would have an amplified gravitational field gradient due to this gravitational vacuum polarization. Exactly enough, it turns out, to explain the dark matter effect…without any dark matter. If Hajdukovic is right, then we’ve been looking for a new particle that doesn’t exist, because dark matter is a strictly quantum field effect.
But that’s not all – the magnitude of the vacuum polarization around galaxy clusters, according to his calculations, also produce just the right long-range gravitational field repulsion to account for the dark energy effect. So with one simple postulate, Hajdukovic solves the two most pressing and insoluble mysteries of modern cosmology. And there may be direct technological opportunities to exploit this effect – that’s my current area of focus right now, because frankly I’m tired of waiting for an answer to this intriguing question; it’s too promising to sit around waiting for the experimental results from CERN.
I understand why people get excited about the EM Drive when they read the wildly optimistic assessments in the popular science press. But again and again we’ve seen radical claims, often by highly credentialed scientists, go up in smoke upon closer examination. Podkletnov’s work circled the drain when other teams couldn’t reproduce his results. Martin Tajmar thought he detected a related effect in a cryonic tube, but a laser interferometer detected no effect, and soon after Tajmar realized that he had simply detected some vapor swirling around his spinning superconductor. Minuscule forces, like we see with the EM Drive, are notoriously easy to mistake for some exotic new effect. And in every case so far, these extraordinary gravitational field effect claims have turned out to be experimental error.
So you have to be skeptical, in the true sense of the word: wait for the preponderance of the evidence to clearly surmount the error bars inherent in every experiment. The EM Drive hasn’t made it that far, not yet anyway. I seriously doubt that it ever will. And until it does, nobody in the physics community is likely to take it seriously – nor should they. At least three independent and qualified teams need to verify the results before anyone should start packing for a trip to Mars.
And you have to understand – light travels faster in hot air than cold air because it’s less dense. And Shawyer’s microwave cavity really is a microwave oven. That puppy gets hot, very hot. So if one arm of your interferometer is going through ambient room temperature air, and the other beam goes through a searing microwave oven, then *of course* the beam through hot air will go faster. It would be a shocker if that didn’t happen.
It’s awful that it’s come to this, but you just can’t trust these crappy articles in the Inquisitr, or even science and technology publications, to get to the bottom of this stuff. You have to read the papers for yourself, and apply careful, skeptical scientific reasoning to them, because even good scientists make mistakes all the time. And by the way, that’s why the last person you should ask about a new invention, is the inventor – it’s human nature to want to discover something extraordinary (and to potentially become famous millionaires, if not Nobel laureates, in the process), so they have the largest bias.
Aerospace companies started looking into gravitational propulsion concepts back in the 50s, as you probably know. I wouldn’t be surprised if they’ve worked it out by now. I saw some infrared video footage that Richard Dolan had taken through a telescope, which looks like odd triangular military craft using some kind of field propulsion in the upper atmosphere.
But Podkletnov’s work has been debunked, sadly. Did you see the BBC special about Project Greenglow? Dr. Martin Tajmar did a good job reproducing Podkletnov’s experimental “force beam” apparatus, and it failed completely. I’ve seen no credible evidence that anyone has ever succeeded in reproducing any of his results.
Interestingly though, Dr. Ning Li started working on a tangentially related concept back in the 90s, and she hasn’t been heard from since the DoD started funding her research. That’s a different kind of project – she was using rotating superconductors to attempt to amplify the gravitomagnetic effect at the molecular scale. And her company, AC Gravity, still exists, so I assume that she’s making progress, or else her funding would’ve been cut.
The AlienScientist has made some interesting videos, but this one is mostly word salad. YouTube videos are rarely a source of useful new information.
Nope. That paper was from 2012. Yang’s team has subsequently analyzed the precision of the torsion pendulum system they used to measure their earlier results, and they discovered that it was much too unstable to measure the thrust that they thought they had seen. Here’s a quote from the retraction paper that reversed their earlier claims:
"In order to explore the thrust performance of microwave thruster the thrust produced by microwave thruster system was measured with three-wire torsion pendulum thrust measurement system and the measurement uncertainty was also studied, thereby judging the credibility of the experimental measurements. The results show that three-wire torsion pendulum thrust measurement system can measure thrust not less than 3mN under the existing experimental conditions with the relative uncertainty of 14%. Within the measuring range of three-wire torsion pendulum thrust measurement system, the independent microwave thruster propulsion device did not detect significant thrust."
“Thrust Measurement of an Independent Microwave Thruster Propulsion Device with Three-Wire Torsion Pendulum Thrust Measurement System," Yang, Liu and Wang et al., Journal of Propulsion Technology, 2016.
forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=39772.0;attach=1113532
Nah. That’s like saying that the rapid introduction of the automobile would destroy the global economy because the horse feed suppliers and the stable providers would go out of business all at once. Instead, it sparked an unprecedented explosion of growth with incalculable benefits.
Historically, technological innovation spurs economic growth, especially advancements in the transportation and energy sectors. Because the costs of transportation and energy are a burden on every business on the planet…except for the bloated and toxic fossil fuel industry. Let’s not even get into the vast costs that we’re already paying in climate change and the cancer epidemic – both direct by-products of fossil fuels.
Cheaper, safer energy, and cheaper, more rapid transport, would reduce this burden on businesses across the globe. And the money saved could then be invested, rather than being pumped into the pockets of a handful of billionaires and radical/violent Middle Eastern nations. People would travel more, and tourism would stimulate local economies around the world. We’d have more money to spend on tangible goods, rather than our energy bills. We’d save time if we could fly over the city to work, instead of being gridlocked in traffic.
Our dependence on fossil fuel is a plague upon our civilization – figuratively and literally. The sooner we abolish it the better. And we haven’t had a fundamental advancement in transportation in many decades, which is a direct impediment to growth. We’re overdue. The number of jobs alone that would be an immediate consequence of either a new advanced form of transportation or a breakthrough in energy technology, would spark a massive new era of growth around the globe, and bring new hope and opportunities to entire nations that have been left out of the industrialization curve, further stimulating the global economy.
No, this isn’t useful. It appears that Dr. Felber has mistaken a relativistic perceptual effect between reference frames, for a local “antigravity” force.
Think of it this way: as an object falls into a distant black hole, it becomes time-dilated. This time dilation effect makes the object –appear- to slow down (and redshift) as it approaches the event horizon. At a distance, we can never see the object cross the event horizon, because of this effect. So you can calculate what the *apparent* force must be, to make the object slow down as it approaches the event horizon. But in its own inertial reference frame, it’s still accelerating. It never experiences any antigravity.
A lot of people are reading the phrase “breakaway civilization” too literally – it hasn’t physically broken away, it’s nestled within our own civilization: proximal but separate.
If you’ve ever met any billionaires, you’ll understand this – they sort of live among us, but in their own little elitist bubble. About the closest you ever get to them is driving alongside them on the road. They don’t eat at the restaurants you eat at, they don’t squeeze into the seat beside you on a jet airliner, they don’t go to your parties, or drink at your local coffee shop.
They enjoy lives of unmitigated luxury and excess within the cities we inhabit, but never really among us. The plutocrats have already broken away from our civilization. And they love it this way, because they get to reap the benefits of owning the world around us, without ever having to confront the strife and suffering they inflict upon us in the process. And surrounded by sycophants and servants, they never have to face a single word of direct personal accountability for their insatiable avarice.
And there's an abundance of technologies that we plebes never get to read about, or benefit from, even though we pay for it with our tax dollars. Under the guise of national security, unimagined vistas of technological capability are withheld from us. If you ever get a chance to ask a research scientist working in the defense industry about this, do it - it's fascinating to see them struggle, caught between the intense desire to brag, and the abject terror of knowing the capabilities of the national surveillance apparatus, and the dire consequences of intense indiscretion.
Last edited:
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
You and @Thomas R Morrison will probably want to check out this link to American Antigravity and the embedded audio interview with Znidarsic: Frank Znidarsic on Antigravity
Last edited:
marduk
quelling chaos since 2352BC
And go where?
We'd see them on the moon. We'd see them on mars. We'd see them at the la grange points. We'd see them in orbit.
ALPHA ROMEO UNIFORM
Whittingham
The John Keel idea of a breakaway systems and its interaction with paranormal worlds is not too far fetch to antigravity and parallel worlds . Not ignoring excellent researcher and journalist Graham Hancock work of lost civilisations. Plauisble the evidence of a factory from which this type of mechanism came from most likely is in the Antarctic or Gobekli Tepi underground structures and vaults. Gobekli Tepe: The World’s First Temple? | History | Smithsonian
What is the Antikythera Mechanism? How was this ancient 'computer' discovered? of thease lost civilisations. Therefore the antigravity and ridicule from some parts of the science community of the concept doesn't look to outlandish comparing to this discovery over hundred years ago regarding technology developments of the past .
What is the Antikythera Mechanism? How was this ancient 'computer' discovered? of thease lost civilisations. Therefore the antigravity and ridicule from some parts of the science community of the concept doesn't look to outlandish comparing to this discovery over hundred years ago regarding technology developments of the past .
marduk
quelling chaos since 2352BC
I'm simply asking the same question I ask about the "hidden bases" that supposedly exist deep underground across the continent.
Why don't they show up in infrared satellite images? Where is the steady stream of food, power, and air it would take? Where is the garbage going? Where do they take a crap?
Logistics. It just doesn't make sense.
ALPHA ROMEO UNIFORM
Whittingham
Agree with your comments Marduk and speculative speaking all electronic device are controlled maybe a filtering systems could be established in some case ? DARPA wants someone to (plug and) play in space -- Defense Systems . On logistics maybe the demisnional world theory is not far stretch and remember the D-Day landings how they hide all the allied gear not impossible? More, speculative thinking maybe it's not in our solar system rather chain system?
Thomas R Morrison
Paranormal Adept
Frank is right about one thing: if we had a material with extremely high nonlinear gravitomagnetic permeability (analogous to the use of iron to amplify a magnetic field), we could probably bring gravitomagnetism into the lab.
Unfortunately, that seems to be just about the only thing that Frank is right about. For example, he says that a gravitomagnetic field would let us “bounce” off the atmosphere. No, that’s not right. Gravitomagnetism obeys the same Gaussian field law as magnetism (which in technical terms states that the divergence of the field is zero); so if you set up a gravitomagnetic field that has a direction pointing downward through the center, then the field points up around the outside with the same total magnitude. The net effect in the atmosphere would be to circulate the gas through the center and back around the outside like a smoke ring. There’s no net propulsive application for such a device, but you could use it like a cannon to launch something through the center of the device.
This kind of thing happens all the time – people coming up with wild theories to explain effects that aren’t real, like cold fusion and Podkletnov’s claims. The “Pioneer anomaly” is a good recent example of this: people saw that the Pioneer spacecraft were slowing down more than expected after leaving the solar system. So lots of people, even some qualified physicists, started to propose new theories about gravity to explain the effect. But it turned out to be a simple radiation pressure effect generated by the power supply aboard the craft.
Frank has simply taken an unwarranted leap of faith to assume that cold fusion and Podkletnov’s results are both real, and then taken a plunge well out of his scientific depth to construct a wild theory to explain them both.
But I don’t like to make a post without offering something positive and interesting, so I’ll leave you with this fascinating little morsel that slipped under most people’s radar. In 2002, an MIT physicist named Jack Wisdom realized that an object undergoing a specific series of deformations in shape could use the gravitational field to “swim” away from a gravitating body. It’s a brilliant and astonishingly original concept, which reveals that even after nearly a century we’re still discovering new possibilities within the theory of general relativity:
“Swimming in Spacetime,” Jack Wisdom, 2002
http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/6706/AIM-2002-017.pdf?sequence=2
Randall
J. Randall Murphy
It's good to know there are some other "outside the box thinkers" out there. I had a bit of a problem with the idea that the system works by repulsion, like two of the same poles of a magnet pushing against each other. If that were the case then it wouldn't be of much use for interstellar travel. It would barely be sufficient for interplanetary travel within solar systems. I wonder if perhaps the assumption that the effect is repulsive is because the disks seem to levitate away from the surface by a repulsive force? If that's the case then we can safely say that the interpretation isn't accurate because that levitation effect is magnetic, not gravitational.
The gravitational anomaly that has been associated with superconductivity and magnetism is a separate thing altogether, but I suspect that the key is still in there someplace, somehow connected to those things. I've tried suggesting that instead of rotating the disks physically, that they leave the disk stationary and rotate a magnetic field around it. That could be done electronically with far greater efficiency. I'm an armchair theorist at best on this, but my thinking is that low temperature superconductors, being as close to a zero-point state that anything material can get, might be forced by a resonant EM field into converting the energy to gravitation.
Somebody give me a lab coat, a crazy hairdo, and a team of nerd engineers wearing black rimmed glasses and I'll build it. Oh I'll also need a couple of secretaries and a bottomless Starbucks card.
DROBNJAK
Paranormal Adept
Many theories point in all directions.
But if we want to stick with where evidence points, than the artificial gravity (not anti-gravity) that UFOs produce is generated by toroidal dipole gravitomagnetic field, that is a part of general relativity. General relativity is proven on hard facts. Nothin' fancy.
There is an excellent book about Water and UFOs which lists 100s of cases proving that its just gravitomagnetic field.
Mind you, its not any easier for us to make gravitomagnetic field than a Alcubiere's warp drive. As I understand warp drives some theoretical problems, while gravitomagnetic all plain sailing, mathematically speaking?
But if we want to stick with where evidence points, than the artificial gravity (not anti-gravity) that UFOs produce is generated by toroidal dipole gravitomagnetic field, that is a part of general relativity. General relativity is proven on hard facts. Nothin' fancy.
There is an excellent book about Water and UFOs which lists 100s of cases proving that its just gravitomagnetic field.
Mind you, its not any easier for us to make gravitomagnetic field than a Alcubiere's warp drive. As I understand warp drives some theoretical problems, while gravitomagnetic all plain sailing, mathematically speaking?
Last edited:
Thomas R Morrison
Paranormal Adept
There is a gravitomagnetic effect like that, but with gravitomagnetism opposite poles repel and like poles attract – the main problem being that the Earth has an absurdly weak gravitomagnetic field (dozens of orders of magnitude weaker than the magnetic field), so there’s virtually nothing to interact with. But that’s not what Frank was saying – he thought that a gravitomagnetic field could interact with the atmosphere itself, to “bounce” an object into space…but it just doesn’t work like that.
I’m not sure what levitation effect you’re talking about here – Podkletnov’s claim of a “repulsor beam” has been experimentally refuted, so there’s no effect to talk about in that case. If anyone detects a repulsion between a spinning superconductor and a nonconductive/nonmagnetic material, then that would be interesting and might point to new physics. But so far, nothing has held up to scrutiny.
A permanent magnet will float above a superconductor because superconductors are perfectly diamagnetic (and flux pinning provides stabilization), but there’s never been a successful confirmed experimental detection of a “gravitational anomaly” in the lab. Not in the public sector anyway.
Haha – yeah it’s a shame that nobody’s handing out teams of research scientists plus a lifetime coffee supply ;
But here’s the thing: you *could* just try out different ideas and see what happens – it’s not really insurmountably expensive to do the kind of thing you’re talking about, at least at a small scale. Electronics and components are amazingly inexpensive nowadays. But it’s kinda crazy to go about it that way.
The best way to go about this stuff is to learn everything you can about physics, then arrive at a novel and interesting hypothesis, and try it out mathematically first. Mathematics is like a kind of “virtual machinery.” It lets you experiment with different ideas, and test those ideas by generating predictions, which you can check against existing observations - with no monetary cost. If your mathematical model makes predictions in a domain that we already have data on, and the data refutes the math, then you know your theory is crap. But if your model predicts accurate experimental/observational findings, plus some new effects that haven’t been tested yet, then you might have something. And at that point you might want to design and build an experimental apparatus to test your idea.
Frank Znidarsic is going about that part correctly – he applied his theory to the hydrogen atom and claims that he can model the electron orbitals classically. I’m skeptical about it, and I very much doubt that he could model the Lamb shift that way, but if he ever publishes a paper on it then I’ll be happy to see what he comes up with.
Thomas R Morrison
Paranormal Adept
Not so much, actually – most of the fringe gravitational claims we hear about don’t offer much, if anything at all, in the way of theory. If they did, it would be a lot easier to expose the hoaxes, as well as the honest mistakes, by demonstrating falsifiable numerical predictions based on the mathematics of those theories.
Nope. I keep trying to explain this but so far only marduk has understood it. I’ll try to be very clear.
Gravitomagentism doesn’t produce any kind of propulsive effect whatsoever – gravitomagnetism can be envisioned as a “twisting” of spacetime. That twisting doesn’t produce any attractive or repulsive effect unless it’s interacting with another very strong gravitomagnetic field. Just like magnets (though with inverse pole interactions). Since most celestial bodies, like planets, have unfathomably weak gravitomagnetic fields (dozens of orders of magnitude weaker than the Earth’s magnetic field, for example), you can’t use it to hover over a planet. But it might be possible to interact with a neutron star or a black hole.
But there is a special case which is interesting: Robert L. Forward’s gravity dipole generator, Here’s an illustration from his paper, “Guidelines to Antigravity”:
In this scenario, if you accelerate some kind of absurdly dense neutron fluid through the windings of the coil, there’s an induced gravitoelectric field through the center. In the same terminology, the Earth has a positive gravitoelectric charge, which we just call “gravity.” So with this device, when the current is increasing or decreasing in speed, there’s a induced positive gravitoelectric charge on one side of the donut hole, and a negative gravitoelectric field on the other side of the donut hole. In other words, one side of the device has an ordinary, attractive, “positive” gravitational field, and the other side has a negative, repulsive “antigravity” field. If you held a cannon ball in front of the positive gravitational side, it would get sucked in through the center and get pushed away on the other side, like a slingshot.
But that’s not the whole story – though that part is really cool. People tend to overlook what’s happening on the outside of the donut. The gravitational acceleration around the outside of the donut possesses an equal and opposite gravitoelectric induction field. So if matter would get launched downward through the center, it would get pulled upward around the outside. Nothing you can do can change that law – no form of gravitomagnetic device, even a gravitoelectric dipole generator, can fly, because the forces always cancel. It’s the same Gaussian field law that applies to electromagnetic fields.
That’s why everyone is so fascinated with the Alcubierre warp field concept – it’s presently the only mathematically rigorous proof that, in principle, a polarized gravitational field can produce propulsion. And not just ordinary propulsion where you have to push against something – but truly reactionless propulsion: you could park an Alcubierre warp field device in the space between galaxy clusters, turn it on, and instantly move at arbitrarily high acceleration to wherever you want to go – because it acts on spacetime itself.
No other known concept within the lexicon of academic physics offers any hope of achieving a similar effect. But as you mentioned, it is a concept fraught with deep, unresolved hurdles – the primary problem being the negative energy problem. We can create a very tiny region of very weak negative energy via the Casimir effect – but we have no idea how to create the enormous magnitude and density of negative energy required for Alcubierre’s concept.
But when astronomers discovered the dark energy effect, it became clear that a positive vacuum energy density couldn’t just theoretically produce a repulsive gravitational field – the universe is actually doing it. However the vacuum energy is extremely weak (10^-8 erg/cm^3), and so far it appears to be 100% isotropic [homogeneous] throughout spacetime. And to use it to make Alcubierre’s concept work, we’d need to concentrate an enormous magnitude of vacuum energy into an incredible dense region – nobody has any idea how to do that, or if it’s even possible.
They say there’s more than one way to skin a cat. Well, if Dragan Hajdukovic is correct, then we may have a new mechanism for interacting with the gravitational field, via the gravitational dipole field of quantum vacuum fluctuations. That idea depends on antimatter falling up in the Earth’s gravitational field, and we have no experimental data on that yet – CERN won’t have results until 2018 at the earliest. But if it turns out that antimatter has a negative gravitational charge, and therefore falls upward in the Earth's gravity field, that's a game changer.
Last edited: