It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gravity Research

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2016 @ 01:49 PM
link   
a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

By a remarkable coincidence I found a link to that paper in my inbox this morning and skimmed it. It discussesnthe possibility of using extremely strong magnetic fields to generate artificial gravity taking advantage of the Equivalency Principle in Relativity. I have not had time to study it in depth, but it does not look like complete woo. Even so, it does not hold out the promise of anti-gravity.




posted on Jan, 9 2016 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

For once this article discusses not only a theoretical concept, but it describes and consider an experimental setup to validate the thesis.



We particularize the setup as following. We consider a set of 10 stacked anti-Helmholtz coils, each constituted by two superconducting solenoids of same length L=2.5m carrying opposite steady electric current of 20kA (which is similar to CMS-class magnets [15]) spaced by a distance of D=2.5m. The external solenoids have a radius of l=5m and the 10 solenoid shells are chosen equally spaced between r=1m and r=5m. The length of the interferometer arm has been chosen to L=50m


The problem is the sheer size of the experimental setup and it is unlikely that he may be able to carry the experiment in the next few weeks, but another team could.


originally posted by: DJW001
I have not had time to study it in depth, but it does not look like complete woo. Even so, it does not hold out the promise of anti-gravity.


Time will tell who might be right, you already seem to pick your side ...
Why do you consider anti-gravity to be more relevant ?



posted on Jan, 9 2016 @ 11:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: Nochzwei
Lol, and you conveniently hoaxed


In what way, pray tell? You were wrong, and you're wrong every time you bring it up. Again.
classical gravity research ain't going on anywhere.



posted on Jan, 9 2016 @ 11:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Nochzwei

Im sure you did start a thread quite recently ended up with some dude nattering on rather incoherently in a video about the light from a candle somehow proving anti gravity exists.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

This one if im not mistaken.
There em wave from the candle is being used to prove time dilation and table top time dilation is linked to anti gravity.
Granted the video assume that retards will not view the video.



posted on Jan, 10 2016 @ 08:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Nochzwei
classical gravity research ain't going on anywhere.


By 'classical' you mean what, no special or general relativity involved?



posted on Jan, 10 2016 @ 08:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Nochzwei

"Granted the video assume that retards will not view the video."

How does a video assume anything? The person in said video sounded borderline retarded himself if you ask me, or at least rather misguided.



posted on Jan, 10 2016 @ 08:56 AM
link   
a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke


Why do you consider anti-gravity to be more relevant ?


Because that seems to be what the OP means by "gravity research." There are several gravity wave telescopes in operation, so gravity research is actually a lively topic right now. There is a great deal of interest among the fringe into anti-gravity. Here's why they shouldn't get their hopes up based on the paper you linked to: by applying a great deal of energy, a magnetic field can be made to simulate the gravitational behavior of inertial mass. This can produce enough force to be measured by bench instruments. In effect, it can enhance Earth's gravitational field locally. If you want to counteract Earth's gravitational field, you would need to supply enough energy to the magnetic field to create the equivalent of Earth's inertial mass: 5.972 × 10^24 kg.



posted on Jan, 10 2016 @ 08:59 AM
link   
Cool beans. I bet it has a relation to this:

en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

With the free time I had to think about what's going on with gravity, I figure it has something to do with the resistance of a vacuum to electromagnetic fields. If you consider that any mass is a super-dense form of energy occupying a small volume, that even makes more sense. There's no special property of mass, it's just an aspect of energy contained in the mass.

BTW, the speed of light is also strongly correlated to this. No guess to the exact mechanism yet, but look into some of the things you can do with numbers and you'll find the big C (Coulomb's constant) and the little c (speed of light) have a strong relationship. (If I recall, one can be found in the derivative of the other in relation to time.)

I think that if you focused enough energy at a spot, it'd also act like a mass was there. I suspect there's a limit to how much power (energy per unit time) can be expressed at any given time. Exceed that, and time itself stretches out. (The result is that you never actually do exceed the limit as you're in the same time-space domain, rather you can only approach that limit. Again, just like the speed of light.) So what happens as time expands to keep the E/t under the maximum ratio? You start seeing gravity.

Thing is, things can also have spin. I'm not sure if there's a way to express that with energy (no negative energy as far as I know yet), but in terms of masses that are concentrated energy we have charge polarity and magnetic polarity. And the effects of EM is stronger than gravity. I also suspect that if you compared a charged mass in a vacuum to a charge-neutral mass there may be some differences. And rather than just a constant field, I suspect if you attached an electronically controlled solenoid to a capacitively charged object in freefall, keeping that magnetic field changing in the right pattern just might be possible to cause a measurable deviation in the direction of freefall. Seems like a simple enough experiment to try testing out a hypothesis.

Might not have anti-gravity, but if you can manipulate it and alter the effective vector or produce a differential in the field (so you get a controllable net force), that may be good enough. Maybe not flying cars right away, but significantly shortens the long duration of space travel. It'll be better than chemical rockets that need a propellant.



posted on Jan, 10 2016 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: Nochzwei
classical gravity research ain't going on anywhere.


By 'classical' you mean what, no special or general relativity involved?
That is correct



posted on Jan, 10 2016 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: Nochzwei
classical gravity research ain't going on anywhere.


By 'classical' you mean what, no special or general relativity involved?
That is correct


In that case, "classical" gravity research has gone nowhere for the past 100 years (exactly) because it has been superceded by Relativity.



posted on Jan, 10 2016 @ 10:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Nochzwei

"Granted the video assume that retards will not view the video."

How does a video assume anything? The person in said video sounded borderline retarded himself if you ask me, or at least rather misguided.
Lol.Did you understand the use of candles or not? Sigh they certainly don't make them like they used to do they.
IMO the dude in the video has generated completely new branch of science and is the greatest inventor of all time.
But hey, believe what you will.



posted on Jan, 10 2016 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Nochzwei

"Lol.Did you understand the use of candles or not?"

I understood the permis of the poor argument presented, that being a candle is being used to prove time dilation via the light being somehow distorted. Multitude of other possibility's that could account for effect through.

"Sigh they certainly don't make them like they used to do they."

You mean candles? No they dont make them like they used to, i think they use machines these day as opposed to hand dipping them.


"IMO the dude in the video has generated completely new branch of science and is the greatest inventor of all time.
But hey, believe what you will."

Really the greatest inventor of all time? What is it he has invented exactly? Because its not anti-gravity unless it does what it says on the tin.
edit on 10-1-2016 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2016 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Nochzwei
The "Dude in the video" is you. This charade is bull#!



posted on Jan, 10 2016 @ 12:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Nochzwei

"Lol.Did you understand the use of candles or not?"

I understood the permis of the poor argument presented, that being a candle is being used to prove time dilation via the light being somehow distorted. Multitude of other possibility's that could account for effect through.

"Sigh they certainly don't make them like they used to do they."

You mean candles? No they dont make them like they used to, i think they use machines these day as opposed to hand dipping them.


"IMO the dude in the video has generated completely new branch of science and is the greatest inventor of all time.
But hey, believe what you will."

Really the greatest inventor of all time? What is it he has invented exactly? Because its not anti-gravity unless it does what it says on the tin.
Lol, you didn't understand nothin about nothin, did you? see the video again and listen carefully.
Not candles, people.
If its not anti gravity, what is it? magic?



posted on Jan, 10 2016 @ 01:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Nochzwei

What can i say you have got yourself one hell of an impressive Vimana there. LoL

Where is this magic? Short of this supposed device lifting itself from the floor and hovering before my eyes that's not anti gravity, that's just one noisy rust bucket that makes a racket. The candles support nothing, nor does the negligible decrees in weight all of which could be caused by other factors or fakery.

What the hell do people have to do with it?

Congratulations you the greatest inventor in the history of the human race, not.

edit on 10-1-2016 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2016 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001


originally posted by: DJW001
There is a great deal of interest among the fringe into anti-gravity. Here's why they shouldn't get their hopes up based on the paper you linked to: by applying a great deal of energy, a magnetic field can be made to simulate the gravitational behavior of inertial mass. This can produce enough force to be measured by bench instruments. In effect, it can enhance Earth's gravitational field locally. If you want to counteract Earth's gravitational field, you would need to supply enough energy to the magnetic field to create the equivalent of Earth's inertial mass: 5.972 × 10^24 kg.


It's not about counteracting earth's gravitational field.
You have obviously not understood or even read a scientific publication you still ambition to comment anyway.



posted on Jan, 10 2016 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Nochzwei


If its not anti gravity, what is it? magic?

lol that's a good one savvy.


There are other options. What is all that racket about?

Something like this maybe?



posted on Jan, 10 2016 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: DenyObfuscation

A homemade ozone generator next to a pair of candles ... cool.



posted on Jan, 10 2016 @ 06:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
a reply to: DJW001


originally posted by: DJW001
There is a great deal of interest among the fringe into anti-gravity. Here's why they shouldn't get their hopes up based on the paper you linked to: by applying a great deal of energy, a magnetic field can be made to simulate the gravitational behavior of inertial mass. This can produce enough force to be measured by bench instruments. In effect, it can enhance Earth's gravitational field locally. If you want to counteract Earth's gravitational field, you would need to supply enough energy to the magnetic field to create the equivalent of Earth's inertial mass: 5.972 × 10^24 kg.


It's not about counteracting earth's gravitational field.
You have obviously not understood or even read a scientific publication you still ambition to comment anyway.


I didn't say the paper was about counteracting the Earth's gravity, did I? What I said that fringe sorts that are interested in counteracting gravity will not find much of interest there. Please take a moment to understand what someone is saying before insulting them.



posted on Jan, 10 2016 @ 08:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Nochzwei

What can i say you have got yourself one hell of an impressive Vimana there. LoL

Where is this magic? Short of this supposed device lifting itself from the floor and hovering before my eyes that's not anti gravity, that's just one noisy rust bucket that makes a racket. The candles support nothing, nor does the negligible decrees in weight all of which could be caused by other factors or fakery.

What the hell do people have to do with it?

Congratulations you the greatest inventor in the history of the human race, not.
4 kg decrease in wt can hardly be termed as negligible. as far as I can judge, I don't see any fakery there. give it sufficient run time you may see the ultimate magic as when the machine hovers, it may not stay in our universe. the bit about candles is way over your head, looks like



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join