It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The Secret Of Gravity Revealed - Scientific Experiment Included

page: 26
<< 23  24  25    27 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 25 2008 @ 01:51 PM
reply to post by atlasastro

i would suppose the difficult part of measuring something that repels mass is that it has likely been long gone. it would have left the surface of earth long ago, looking for some kind of universal equilibrium or balance of negative and positive charge.

However, if you look into the element 115 concept, there are those who believe that it can be contained as a stable isotope, and that it might have some level of repulsive capability, anti-grav if you will.

It has been created in a lab, and it is theoretically capable of stability. But there is none of it on earth. Is that because it "left" long ago, when replelled by our sysstems gravity? If some other form was created, would it not seek to leave MUY RAPIDO?

posted on Jul, 30 2008 @ 11:24 AM
reply to post by Has2b

I am guessing it is because the top upside down v is mirrored by the imedieant lower block and its two smaller opposing blocks on opposing ends which visualy and physicaly resemble a V hence also resembelence equals resembling function. That function being a directing amplification of the original upside down V. The largest block as well as the lower block is functioning the same way as the 'crown' does. That meaning the upper upside down turned V is the same thing as the largest block as well as the lower block. Then if it is the same thing then the pattern is continuing...The only question is to what purpose?

posted on Aug, 5 2008 @ 06:52 PM
Please visit this thread:

Then watch the video...

The cat is out of the bag.

posted on Aug, 5 2008 @ 08:21 PM

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
When a material(mass) attracts or repels another material(mass), the force responsible is called magnetism. Oddly enough, "gravity" is the force responsible for a material(mass) attracting another material(mass).

Some well-known materials that exhibit easily detectable magnetic properties (called magnets) are nickel, iron, cobalt, and their alloys; however, all materials are influenced to greater or lesser degree by the presence of a magnetic field.

This is one of my favorite little videos...

A non magnetic substance with a little COLD added and Voila

Its very cold in space

posted on Aug, 5 2008 @ 08:39 PM
I am sure all skeptics here will agree aluminum is non magnetic...

so explain THIS

posted on Aug, 5 2008 @ 09:02 PM
Damn zorgon, you must sharpen your sword every day, it's razor sharp!


Yes, I wonder what cool things NASA found while playing with the vacuum coldness of space.

posted on Aug, 5 2008 @ 09:09 PM

Originally posted by seawolf197
Hey OP, here is an alternate view to your theory, and it's pretty compelling.

If you haven't seen this video take a chance on it. Although it is quite long, I found it to be very interesting. Nassim Haramein has a very different take on gravity.

Google Video Link

I second this, I have just finished watching both videos from his 2003 lecture and the arguments he presents are compelling to say the least. I do not regret sitting through almost eight hours of video.

The amount of common sense and plain logic that he uses is very refreshing because he shows how out-of-the-box thinking can be applied when you are not fully brainwashed by the education system and have retained that critical and inquisitive way of thinking that many lack these days.

Since then he has published some papers (peer reviewed) and they are available on his website at The Resonance Project

The papers do contain calculations so anyone reading might need to "freshen up" on their math.

[edit on 5-8-2008 by amigo]

posted on Aug, 5 2008 @ 09:57 PM

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
Yes, I wonder what cool things NASA found while playing with the vacuum coldness of space.

[redacted] that have errrr 'interesting' cloaking abilities ....

As to my sword... dull edges are hard to shave with

posted on Aug, 5 2008 @ 10:12 PM

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
With a gyroscope, the outer diameter is statically charged, and the mass of the gyroscope is attracted to that charge.

I apologize for being late to this discussion but I only just discovered this thread (and registered with ATS). The topic of gyroscopes has held my interest since I was a kid so this post caught my attention. It has been pretty easy for me to grasp the mundane explanation of how a gyroscope works by applying the principle of angular momentum. The idea that magnetism may be the mechanism is new to me. You have given me a new idea to wrap my brain around but I have a few questions.

The angular momentum model leads to the conclusion that a toy top and a gyroscope operate in the same manner. That is, in both cases, their stability is derived from the angular momentum produced by their spinning motion. In another post you provide a diagram which seems to illustrate an entirely different principle at work on a top than the one you describe for the operation of a gyroscope. Are the two really so different that they require different explanations or have I misinterpreted your the diagram for the top?

Can you help me with an explanation of precession using the magnetic model? In relation to my previous question; if there are two different principles at work, I would appreciate knowing how precession occurs under both.

Lastly, in the post in which I found your diagram of a top, you make the following statement; "Then when the two magnets are actually in physical contact, they SHARE THEIR COMPLETE 'ENERGY' TOGETHER, because they no longer have the air/space insulation distance, and they can freely pass their "energy" from one body to the next because they are actually touching." I am confused by this statement in contrast to the quote I've taken at the start of this post. If, by "the outer diameter" you are referring to the outer edge of the ring of the gyroscope, why would the outer edge and inner edge be differently charged if they are indeed in physical contact?

This is a long thread and I haven't gone through it in one sitting. If I've missed something along the way please forgive me.

posted on Aug, 5 2008 @ 10:58 PM
Dr. Grigarov has been working on a room temperature superconductor that he has coined "Ultraconductor". This work is being funded by AFRL:

Ultraconductors™ are patented materials being developed for commercial applications. They are made by the sequential processing of amorphous polar dielectric elastomers. They exhibit a set of anomalous magnetic and electric properties, including: very high electrical conductivity (> 1011 S/cm -1) and current densities (> 5 x 108 A/cm2) over a wide temperature range (1.8 to 700 K). Additional properties established by experimental measurements include: the absence of measurable heat generation under high current; thermal versus electrical conductivity orders of magnitude in violation of the Wiedemann-Franz law; a jump-like transition to a resistive state at a critical current; a nearly zero Seebek coefficient over the temperature range 87 - 233 K; no measurable resistance when Ultraconductor™ films are placed between superconducting tin electrodes at cryogenic temperatures

Check out his list of patents. Very promising research.


Zorgon, that comment you make about it being cold in space....i am now considering that. That is some very powerful suggestion, my friend. when i consider the whole "lattice ions" thing, as presented by Podkletnov, as well as the work of Dr. Poher and other research on cryogenic superconductors, it gives me much reason to pause.

posted on Aug, 5 2008 @ 11:04 PM

Originally posted by zorgon
I am sure all skeptics here will agree aluminum is non magnetic...

so explain THIS

The mundane explanation would be the Lenz Effect.

Aluminum is not magnetic but the the magnet By Faraday's law, the moving magnet produces an electric current in the aluminum plate (which does conduct electricity). The same way a generator works. Because the aluminum plate does not provide a complete circuit the electrical energy forms sort of an internal current. This electrical current produces a magnetic field opposite to the field of the disc. Thus the repulsion. The Aluminum is not magnetic but the induced "eddy current" within it produces a magnetic field. Note that this experiment will work with any electrically conductive material for the plate. Non-conductive materials will not work.

The relationship between electricity and magnetism is well established. What does this experiment have to do with the magnetism/gravity discussion?

posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 11:35 PM
reply to post by ALLis0NE

Your bringing god into this I would think as smart as you are you would know by now there is no god and to think there is a god is just silly?

posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 11:42 PM
If this is true, I'd be interested in knowing how this relates to space-time. By that I mean, how does gravity slow down time.

Also, I only read the first pages (ish), so please U2U me anything on this. I like this kind of science with a passion.

posted on Aug, 27 2008 @ 02:35 AM

Originally posted by evanmontegarde
I didn't read most of this thread so this may have been brought up before, but some accepted (i.e. peer reviewed, thoroughly researched) scientific theory states that gravity and electromagnetism are the same force...Along with strong and weak nuclear. The four fundamental forces were initially one that split off for reasons I can't explain because I'm not a nuclear physicist.

I am a physicist, but not a nuclear one.

There are plenty of theoretical physics papers which are published, and yet are not actually true. It is accepted to propose exotic theories (meaning not accepted and not justified by experiment or deep theoretical analysis)---they are published if they are not "obviously stupid or wrong", as is unfortunately most of the ignorant pseudophysics here.

Here is the current understanding in generally accepted physics:

1) electromagnetism and gravity are fundamentally different. Gravity warps spacetime which affects ALL forces and everything in it. That is the profound insight of Einstein. That is not true of electromagnetism. Electromagnetism couples to charged particles only. Gravity couples to everything. Electromagnetism couples to protons and electrons in exactly the same magnitude but opposite sign. As sources of gravity the masses of various particles is not at all obvious or in any particularly well-explained ratio. This is a long-winded way of saying "electromagnetic charge is not mass".

2) The accepted theory of gravitation---which has been continuously validated with remarkable experiments and astrophysical observations (as other competing theories get denied) is still straight up Einsteinian general relativity.

3) In general relativity, electromagnetism can serve as a source term of gravitation (i.e. "light gravitates" )but the size of the coupling in practical terms is exceptionally small. Roughly if you convert the same energy into mass, that's about how much (in size) it causes "new" gravity. But in classical physics it's the stress-energy tensor of matter plus that of electromagnetic fields which is the source term in GR.

[edit on 27-8-2008 by mbkennel]

posted on Aug, 27 2008 @ 03:42 AM

Originally posted by mbkennel
I am a physicist, but not a nuclear one.

Papers Please

posted on Aug, 27 2008 @ 07:55 AM

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
I am releasing information about gravity. It is all a lie. Gravity is nothing more the magnetic force. Magnetic force is nothing more than electric particles. A vast amount of particles are circulating around Earth. South polarity particles leave the North Hemisphere, and North polarity particles leave the South Hemisphere. Both particles bend around the entire Earth and are attracted to their opposite. This means in the North Hemisphere, North particles are raining down from the sky to Earth. In the South Hemisphere, South polarity magnets are raining down from the sky to Earth.

You can test this with a simple experiment. Read the following web page:


Materials Needed:
1: Long piece of thread, or string.
2: 12 inch long piece of hard steel fishing wire.
3: Strong magnet.

Take the long piece of thread, and tie it to the ceiling, or something high above, and let it hang down. Then tie the string to the exact center of the 12 inch long piece of hard steel fishing wire, so that the weight of the steel wire is perfectly balanced. Just like image below:

Now take your strong magnet, and magnetise the steel wire by running the magnet from one side to the other (ex: left to right) multiple times. You can also use "electricity" to magnetise the wire if you don't have a strong magnet. Once the steel wire is magnetised, you should see the wire become unbalanced. In the North Hemisphere, the South pole of the magnet rises higher than the North pole as shown in the illustration below:

As you can see, the magnetic field has a direct effect on the weight and balance of the steel wire. This is scientific proof that a magnetic field effects the weight and balance of an object. Also it proves experimentally that with the right amount of magnetism, you can levitate from Earth. "Anti-Gravity" is nothing more than magnetic repulsion from Earth.

Congratulations! You have managed to plagiarize (yet, at the same time, rewrite in better english) the works of Edward Leedskelnin.

posted on Aug, 27 2008 @ 11:50 PM
oy vey.

The fact that gravity is not electromagnetism is made plain by anybody who's had an MRI.

If strong magnetic fields were "gravity" then they would cause gravitational lensing and optical distortion.

But they don't---you can have 10 tesla magnetic fields and you can see the instrument perfectly fine. Nothing optically happens when the magnet is turned on.

If somebody makes an experiment which displays "desktop gravitational lensing", now that would be the breakthrough.

(edit: actually the B^2/8pi energy density gravitates, as does the air in the room, but the coupling constant is so absolutely miniscule that the effect is effectively zero on a human measurable scale.)

[edit on 27-8-2008 by mbkennel]

posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 01:46 AM

Originally posted by mbkennel
The fact that gravity is not electromagnetism is made plain by anybody who's had an MRI.

Perhaps you would care to explain the principle behind THIS device...

And then explain to me why, since the Earth is a magnetic spinning dipole that a ship with a strong magnetic field that is also spinning would not provide lift off the planet?

And the explain why MIT has succesfully built and tested a Levitating Dipole Fushion confinement device that they feel confident will be able to provide lift to a ship when installed inside? (once they get that steady supply of HE3 from the Moon thats is)

Anti Gravity is assumeing a force equal and opposite to gravity... just like anti matter is the opposite of matter

What happens when you put the two together? They cancel each other out... usually violently...

Not much use for operating a space craft..

What you need is gravity shielding... funny then that there are so many papers at LANL on gravity shielding experiments

[edit on 28-8-2008 by zorgon]

posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 02:06 AM
double post sorry

[edit on 8/28/2008 by whatukno]

posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 02:06 AM
reply to post by zorgon

isn't that a top with two opposing magnetic poles? The bottom plate is a magnet with one pole while the top itself is made of two poles, when you spin it, it will actually float because now the negatively attracted pole is in motion negating the positive attracting pole.

And before with Aluminum. Everything is magnetic to a certain extent. Thats how an MRI works. (of course us humans have a lot of iron in our system) but the concept is the same. Aluminum is a great insulator of magnetic energy.

As far as gravity is concerned. While the force is not as strong as that of magnetism It is a force, that force is mass. The more mass an object has the more of a gravitational field a object creates.

new topics

top topics

<< 23  24  25    27 >>

log in