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.

 

New form of 'Anti-Grav' Propulsion possibly discovered

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 12 2006 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zhukov


So? The crude oil market drove out the whale blubber industry, the steam engine drove out the sail ship industry. Don't use the axioms of what might happen to major corporations to justify such a belief. Think about what you are saying. We have had nuclear power for well over 40 years and yet it has not done so much as made a small dent in the hydrocarbon industry.



Originally posted by The Zodiac


I can't say for certain. I am waiting for the aftermath of Feburary 14.




posted on Feb, 12 2006 @ 01:36 AM
link   
Stumason, nothing's violated because you aren't actually changing the mass. It's that your APPARENT mass has changed. For this same reason, a particle moving at nearly light speed does not collapse into a black hole. So someone looking at you while you travel near light-speed would measure your mass as normal, but your energy as very high. From your own point of view, your energy is normal, but your mass has increased.

So, it's not a REAL change in mass.

Also, it's mass that apparently there because of all the energy that you're expending to achieve near-light speed. That energy is being changed into apparent mass, and so mass-energy violations do not occur.

And Shadowforce, I am very, very confident in that gravity is a change in space-time. It's not that gravity creates a change in space-time, it's that space-time gives the illusion of gravity. But you're right, we DON'T understand this very well. We don't know what it is about mass that does this. We don't know "how fast" this change in space-time occurs. The graviton might exist, as a carrier of the change in space-time... or it might not.

The important thing to remember about this space-time distortion that creates gravity is that it's a 4-dimensional change that changes the course that you're travelling in. If you were two dimensional (say a line) on a sheet of rubber, a 3-dimensional change would change your direction... since the 2-dimensional space warps to create the 3-dimensional change. To you, you're still going straight, but what is straight has been changed.

The space that you move into is still in front of you - perfectly in front of you really - it's just that perfectly in front of you is now perfectly below you.

But still, we may be able to measure these changes - but we still don't know what causes them.

Going back to the rubber analogy, normally matter works by pushing "downwards" on the rubber. If you, a ball, rolls across this, your 3-dimensional position changes, as it dips inwards, and your 2-dimensional direction also changes. Assuming you escape this hole, you resume on the normal 2-dimensional plan, but in front of you is now elsewhere.

This "anti-gravity" cone/line may be a sort of reversal. It may be you poking "up" into the rubber - causing the ball to roll away from bump - and once again causing a 2-d change in direction.

Once again, I restate that this theory needs to be proven before I accept it, however IF (and that's a big if) it is proven, then it shows that we could not only be facing gravitons, or anti-gravitons, but VIRTUAL gravitons and anti-gravitons... which would mess with things even more. The problem of course comes when these virtual gravitons and anti-gravitons find a way to nomally interact with our universe... which this theory may show to happen.

Anyways, I look forward to see if they prove or disprove this. Either is a success.



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 11:03 AM
link   
I can say I havent read any of the replies but i did read the story and I think this is almost the biggest breakthru in space travel that has happened so far. The ability to travel to distant starsystems at almost the speed of light, thats just unreal.

But once you start thinking of it if you would have told someone a hundred years ago that we would be traveling across the ocean in hours and going up into space would almost be routine then they woudl think thats unreal to. Im sure before the century is out that spacelight travel will be possible, i just hope it happens in my lifetime since im still pretty young.



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 02:48 PM
link   
This seems a little more viable to me. It's the current favored theory from what I can tell.



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 06:44 PM
link   
Nice find. If this is to be found true then my fears are coming to reality. Soon this planet will be uninhabitable and I dont think that the powers that be want to stick around to see the outcome of their dirtywork. Given the good doctors background with government, is it possible that he knew of this a while ago and is just now cleared to come forward with this info?
Isn't it convenient how we are making leaps and bounds in our discoveries
regarding space exploration? Check this one out www.physorg.com...

I smell potential disaster



posted on Feb, 13 2006 @ 10:53 PM
link   
Actually, guys, he's not presenting any devices.

He's presenting a formula. The formula works only under special theoretical conditions that haven't been achieved on Earth.

He's "for real" (I googled up his papers) and he's into math that is really really eye-crossing: www.osti.gov...

His "peer review" may be a tad bit biased -- the PhD who reviewed it is with the American Antigravity Foundation and is not affiliated with a school, nor was there (apparently) a second or third or fourth peer reviewer (as is usual with most academic papers.)

It'll be interesting to see this one, but whether it plays out in any significant way remains to be seen.



posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 02:36 AM
link   
When it's already been demonstrated in lab replicable experiments that relativity is... well relative (I.E light being literally stopped and speed beyond the speed of C in labs) the fact that some blindly cling to dogma is a bit vexxing to me. It's like the columbus debate historically about who discoverred america... a situation where literal physical prove is discarded in favor of a popular misconception (I.E. the vikings you slow ones in the audience). I have no doubt that relativity can be sidestepped but don't put it down to general popular myth, episodes of star trek, or some vain hope of exploring an alien homeworld myself. I put it down to general science and an understanding that the einsteinian equations were based on a physical propulsion source. If you account special relativity worm hole theory and the warp bubble theory their due, as they are mathematically at least semi viable, they all offer hope of faster than C travel at significant energy savings to the original simplified relativity theory.


edit: oh yeah and here's a link to warp theory according to one guy news.bbc.co.uk... basically what I'm saying is general relativity is nice and explains life on a day to day basis quite nicelly. BUT at some point we have to acknowledge we are already pushing the limits of that theory.

[edit on 14-2-2006 by Sugarlump]



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 12:12 PM
link   
So what has anyone heard?



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 03:03 PM
link   


Anti-gravity doesn't exist. Gravity is the effect of a fold in space-time, it's a force. There is no anti-force for gravity.


I've sometimes wondered about the notion of gravity as a "force," since that carries with it an implication of activity. Lately, I've been thinking of gravity as a "quality," like polarization. Mass tending to polarize space-time in an "inward-outward" direction (or dimension) such that any other mass, doing the same, will encounter decreased resistance in proximity. If you could somehow shift the polarity of an object so that it's less "parallel" and more "perpendicular" to another object (or all other objects) then the effect would be one of increased resistance that would look like a reduction in the effect of gravity on the object. If you could shift the polarity to 90 degrees, the object would essentially be gravity "invisible." I'm not sure whether this would make the object appear to be massless (which would be nice for relativistic travel, wouldn't it?), or just weightless. I tend to think maybe the latter, since a massless object could, I suppose, just pass through other objects, and in my imagination, I see "solid" objects maintaining a kind of overall integrity even in the nine (?) dimensions we're talking about here. Anyway, if you had say, a flying saucer, you'd still be able to fly around by subtley shifting the polarity of the ship, sort of like balancing magnets on their like poles. Shift one way or another and... zip! Off you go. Zero resistance at right angles to the field.

Of course, I have no idea how one might go about altering gravitic polarity. I guess that's the trick, huh? But I have a hunch that it's not as hard as it may first appear.




posted on May, 7 2009 @ 10:22 PM
link   
I've been googling around, haven't found any news on this man or his formula. Latest is 2006. Anyone ?



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 10:43 PM
link   
if gravity is caused by the supposed graviton higgs-boson or any other particle type and super symmetry holds true then there would be a symmetric partner particle with opposite properties. The problem is though the same as with anti-matter we know at the beginning there was almost equal parts matter and anti matter but for some reason regular matter is more abundent (at least as far as we can tell). We know matter must have annihilated most of the anti-matter. But finding an anti gravity particle would be next to impossible IF gravity can enter the other unseen spatial dimensions its anti particle could do the same making it as hard if not harder to find then the higgs. . . .

this is all conjecture of course

CW



[edit on 7-5-2009 by constantwonder]



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Toadmund
Well, if there is a repulsive anti-gravity beam in front of the near light speed object, how does it go forward?


It goes forward normally from your point of view. From an outside observer, that beam won't seem to leave you.

That is the concept of special relativity.

You shouldn't worry to much about it -- if you have nobody on Earth to miss... Because every tick of you clock at near light speeds may be ticking years elsewhere.

At very very near light speed, you can watch the universe/s evolve in mere seconds.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Yarium

Anti-gravity doesn't exist. Gravity is the effect of a fold in space-time, it's a force. There is no anti-force for gravity.


I believe Newton’s third law, "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." can apply to gravitational forces and we have no contrary proof to its possibility. We will unleash the opposite to gravity, and we will make it our slave in the near future.

Just to note the logic; if gravity is a fold in space time, then a massive gravitational force could fold a large section of space and allow one to jump vast distances.

However, what would the opposite be? Not a folding in space time toward, but a warping, or bending back of it onto itself. Allowing one again to step across a greater distance.

Remember all of life is two sides of the same coin.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 02:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Absum!
I believe Newton’s third law, "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." can apply to gravitational forces and we have no contrary proof to its possibility. We will unleash the opposite to gravity, and we will make it our slave in the near future.


Newton's 3rd law isn't absolute, it can be broken even without 'radiation reaction'. Same way Law of Conservation of Energy can be temporarily violated(it's a known scientific fact, although not very popular)

However, I'm not sure if it's absolute in a sense you don't create the reaction in a different dimension of reality. But at least the concept works and may open up a new world of possibilities including interstellar exploration and 'free energy', notice the ' ' free energy devices may not be entirely free energy in the absolute sense.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by ShadowXIX
 



Agreed, any claim that is stated positive proof for or against the existence of something with todays low level of understanding is ludicrous. As far I know there is a anti particle for everything, so if the graviton is proven to exist then there is likely an anti-graviton.

But also a lot of theoretical antigrav technology also does use electromagnetics to manipulate gravity, beings that gravity is the weakest of all the four forces. There is some promising theories of "electrogravitation" and others that seem to have promise of unifying EM and gravity.

Also I think research should be vested into the strong and weak nuclear forces, as they are the strongest force fields. They apparently don't have any problem overcoming gravity.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by ahnggk
 


I think that everyone tries to make things to complex. I don't think using antigravity would create extradimensional causalities at all. It is just manipulating our 4 dimensions. Nor do I think the solution lays within extradimensional physics.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Toadmund
 


Could you link the source?




top topics



 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join