Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

"Anti-Gravity" thrown around way too loosely on ATS...

page: 1
5

log in

join

posted on Feb, 2 2010 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Members,

I believe the subject speaks for itself. I'm no expert on radical technology or advanced aircraft, and thus often defer to the more knowledgable folks in this subject matter. However, given the vast amount of traffic this site receives, I felt it was important to set the record straight.

Albert Einstein's view that gravity can be explained by geometry is still the most commonly held belief today. This is why we are stuck to the earth. Planets and stars are so massive that they warp the "space-time" around them causing something best described as gravity pits.

This is exactly why the term "anti-gravity" doesn't make any sense. In order to undo the effects of earth's mass, you would have to have a negative mass... say what? How Stuff Works The subject of negative mass can best be described as highly speculative with no concrete proof of it's existence.

Instead, let's go back to the basics of how we move objects of mass. In order to move an object a force must act upon that object. That is basic Newtonian physics. There are many ways this could happen:

1) Mechanical force (i.e. person1 pushes person2, and person2 is moved)
2) Pressures such as fluid or gas (i.e. Hydraulics or hot air balloons)
3) Rocketry/Jets
4) Friction
5) Particle Expulsion (ion engines)
6) Force Fields (electric or magnetic)

Let me know if you think I'm missing anything!

When people say that UFOs, Secret Black-Ops Craft, etc uses "Anti-Gravity" technology, I think a better way of looking at this Holy Grail would be some sort of force field, or perhaps more accurately- an acceleration field which acts on all matter, not just charged particles. How exactly such an acceleration field would be possible is beyond me. It is apparently beyond modern science too unless those NWO and Air Force folks are hiding something that has elluded every well known brainiac thus far.


My point is simply that we should be cautious on how we use the term "anti-gravity" for the sake of denying ignorance. If we are assuming that black budget vehicles such as the TR3 do exist, then I think it's more logical to assume these vehicles have mass (like anything else) but use some unknown (or sparsely known) principle to accelerate them.

-SJ76




posted on Feb, 2 2010 @ 05:40 PM
link   
When in doubt, ask your local alienscientist



all props to youtube's AlienScientist. subscribe to him now. he is growing quickly in this odd theoretical field.



posted on Feb, 2 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   
Anti gravity lol dont make me laugh. I too once thought it was possible then I realised how absurd the idea was.
There are 4 forces in nature that make up the universe and those are the strong and weak nuclear force electromagnetism and gravity.
Now lets think this logically shall we? If anti gravity was real then it stands to reason the same can be said of the other 3 forces. There should be an anti weak and strong nuclear force and an anti electromagnetism force.
Now lets think of the implications of such things lets take anti electromagnetism. If such a thing exists then anything entering the field would immediately break down into atoms as electromagnetism is the force that bonds atoms together.
Now an anti strong nuclear force would break any atom into protons and neutrons that would have formed the nucleus of an atom.

It is clear that this types of fields are impossible if you think about it and it is only logical the same can be said of gravity.

So in other words you can only have gravity modification effects not anti gravity



posted on Feb, 2 2010 @ 06:09 PM
link   
You Hit the nail on the head here

It is apparently beyond modern science too unless those NWO and Air Force folks are hiding something that has elluded every well known brainiac thus far.


I really feel that there is a "Armada" of these ships just waiting for for the go order.
Ist Sighting



posted on Feb, 2 2010 @ 06:10 PM
link   
Just curious...Why would there be anti electromagnetism and anti weak/strong nuclear forces if there was anti gravity?



posted on Feb, 2 2010 @ 07:30 PM
link   
How about we just lower our standards a bit and we can all be happy.

From now on, how about, anything that challenges the effects of gravity can now and forever be spoken as , "Anti-Gravity" .

It is a Win Win situation.

I love it when I'm awesome.



posted on Feb, 2 2010 @ 07:38 PM
link   
Anti Gravity?

Who is T.T. Brown?

Early and middle years

Brown was born in Zanesville, Ohio; his parents were Lewis K. and Mary Townsend Brown. In 1921, Brown discovered what was later called the Biefeld-Brown effect while experimenting with a Coolidge X-ray tube. This is a vacuum tube with two asymmetrical electrodes. Brown noticed that there was a force exerted by the tube when it was connected to a high-voltage source. This force was not caused by the X-rays, but by this new effect. Later, in 1923, he collaborated with Paul Alfred Biefeld at Denison University, Granville, Ohio. He started a military career afterwards and was involved in a number of science programs. In 1930 he joined the U.S. Navy and conducted fundamental research in electromagnetism, radiation, field physics, spectroscopy, gravity and other topics. He later worked for Glenn L. Martin and, still later, for the National Defense Research Committee (NDRC) and the Office of Scientific Research and Development, headed at that time by Dr. Vannevar Bush. After 1944 he worked as a consultant to the Lockheed-Vega Aircraft Corporation.

Later years

In 1955, Brown went to England, and then France where he worked for La Société Nationale de Construction Aéronautique du Sud Ouest (SNCASO). In 1956, the aviation trade publication Interavia reported that Brown had made substantial progress in anti-gravity or electro-gravitic propulsion research. Top U.S. aerospace companies had also become involved in such research (see United States gravity control propulsion research (1955 - 1974)) which may have become a classified subject by 1957. Others contend Brown's research simply reached a dead end and lost support. Though the effect he discovered has been proven to exist by many others, Brown's work was controversial because others and even he himself believed that this effect could explain the existence and operation of unidentified flying objects (UFOs). Brown was an early investigator of UFOs and in 1956 helped found the National Investigations Committee on Aerial Phenomena (NICAP).

Though Townsend resigned not long after NICAP was founded, NICAP was an influential force in civilian UFO research through 1970. The organization's activities drew the attention of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), several high-level officers of which joined the group. Brown's research has since become something of a popular pursuit around the world, with amateur experimenters replicating his early experiments in the form of "lifters" powered by high-voltage.



I highly recommend going back to that link and try to bring up his patents from the US Patent office yes the link is official. Hint good luck



T.T. Brown Electrogravity Vacuum Experiments



Electrogravitics

Electrogravitics is a research subject based upon the original work of Nikola Tesla, and hypotheses advanced by Thomas Townsend Brown and Brown's subsequent extensive experimentation and demonstrations of the effect. The term was in widespread use by 1956.[1] The effects of electrogravity have been searched for extensively in countless experiments since the beginning of the 20th century; to date, other than Brown's experiments and the more recent ones reported by R. L. Talley[2], Eugene Podkletnov, and Giovanni Modanese, no conclusive evidence of electrogravitic signatures has been found. Recently, some investigation has begun in electrohydrodynamics (EHD) or sometimes electro-fluid-dynamics, a counterpart to the well-known magneto-hydrodynamics, but these do not seem a priori to be related to Brown's "electrogravitics"


United States gravity control propulsion research (1955 - 1974)

American interest in "gravity control propulsion research" intensified during the early 1950s. Literature from that period used the terms anti-gravity, anti-gravitation, baricentric, counterbary, electrogravitics, G-projects, gravitics, gravity control, and gravity propulsion.[1][2] Their publicized goals were to develop and discover technologies and theories for the manipulation of gravity or gravity-like fields for propulsion.[3] Although general relativity theory appeared to prohibit anti-gravity propulsion, several programs were funded to develop it through gravitation research from 1955 to 1974. The names of many contributors to general relativity and those of the golden age of general relativity have appeared among documents about the institutions that had served as the theoretical research components of those programs.[4][5][6] The existence and 1950s emergence of the gravity control propulsion research had not been a subject of controversy for aerospace writers, critics, and conspiracy theory advocates. But its rationale, effectiveness, and longevity have been the objects of contested views.


Link to source below.
It's a very interesting Read.
I highly recommend it.

Enjoy
Definitive Back Engineered Alien Technology Research thread



posted on Feb, 2 2010 @ 08:08 PM
link   
I'm a bit of a dreamer when it comes to anti gravity. I would love to think that it exists somewhere.

My question is why does it seem that all of Nikola Tesla's work has gone underground? He seemed to be in the ball-park of where it may have been possible. Where are the new and fresh discoveries based on his theories. He seemed to be convinced, before he died, that this kind of technology was just around the corner and that he could achieve some remarkable results.

I am convinced that the PTB swooped in a scooped it all up and any emerging scientist in that field has been recruited and given the carte blanche to develop it further.

Am I way off on this or does anybody else feel that the public/society is being denied the "Tesla Effect" with regards break throughs ?



posted on Feb, 2 2010 @ 08:29 PM
link   
I used to enjoy throwing "anti-gravity" around.

Then one day I threw it up into the air and it never came back down.



posted on Feb, 5 2010 @ 12:48 PM
link   
Hey Scramjet76,

I have created a couple threads on the subject myself that you might be interested in reading:


Cheers



posted on Feb, 5 2010 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


that is good stuff. thank you for sharing it. I will add him to my list of video's to watch/download.

Anti-gravity is something that is usually applied to refer to any non-traditional means of getting into the air. The Hutchison effect was considered anti-gravity, until the effect became fully understood and documented. Now it is called "The Hutchinson Effect".

The Podkletnov experiments, repeated by Ning Li/Ron Koczor, utilize what is thought to be "lattice ions", presumably creating enough angular momentum to negate the force of gravity. Since it isn't fully understood and documented (publicly), it is still considered antigravity.

The EM levitation of frogs is well understood, as is the acoustic levitation of corks and styrofoam. These are not considered antigravity.

It all has to do with the general understanding. "Anti-gravity" is a relative term, a catch all used to designate a form of levitation that is not well understood.

Consider, to be useful in space flight, it would have to actually find a way to manipulate the gravitational force, or completely overcome it by manipulating the force.



posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Scramjet76
 



The subject of negative mass can best be described as highly speculative with no concrete proof of it's existence.


Leave it to a human being to say, because I don't understand it, IMPOSSIBLE IT IS!

Give me break, humans' don't understand nothing about the universe, but it seems to do just fine!

So I suggest, instead of using old theory that doesn't explain, why not develop one that does.

Makes sense to me, but heck, why not just say no.



posted on Apr, 6 2010 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


A truly great find. To understand, quick and easy. Im going to try that just to see if it works. A neat little toy. I give you a thumbs up
oops, found diferent video, not of one saturnfx found but on anti-gravity and how to make it.

[edit on 6-4-2010 by nite owl]



posted on Apr, 17 2010 @ 08:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by theability
reply to post by Scramjet76
 



The subject of negative mass can best be described as highly speculative with no concrete proof of it's existence.


Leave it to a human being to say, because I don't understand it, IMPOSSIBLE IT IS!


I think it is more like "Because there is no proof I am not going to go on the internet and claim that it is real and that the government is hiding it from us."



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Antigrav is no big deal, this poster savvy built a zero point energy system as well as antigrav gen capabilities with an erector set. Theres pics in the the gray area. It has lightbulbs, plywood, the works...

I think a lot of people that throw around the term antigravity cant even fathom what antigrav actually is.



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by DrJay1975
 




I think a lot of people that throw around the term antigravity cant even fathom what antigrav actually is.


In our macro-level existence, gravity is space that is distorted by mass, so would have to have negative mass to produce "anti-gravity."

It may be possible to simulate a type of anti-gravity using other means.




posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


While the effects are observable, I'm not sure anything resembling "anti-gravity" can be shouted from the rooftops. I'm familar with Fouche's claims of reducing the mass of up to 89%. I believe it is hogwash. The claims are all over the internet for the world to see. Such technology would be a holy grail and not just applicable to lifting space vehicles.


the Russian advocate of "anti-gravity", Podkletnov[18]. While experimenting with rotating superconductors he noticed that pipe smoke from a nearby researcher appeared to be collecting in a column above his apparatus. He then devised an experiment in which he magnetically levitated a superconducting rotating disc, and he reported that objects held above the rotating disc underwent a reduction of between 0.5 to 2% in weight.
wiki

Perhaps the electrostatic energy created some sort of ionic acceleration which counteracted the acceleration field caused by gravity (to some small degree)? I highly doubt that it actually altered the object's mass.

Besides...


Although the acceleration produced by the spinning superconductor was 100 millionths of the acceleration due to the Earth's gravitational field, it is a surprising one hundred million trillion times larger than Einstein's General Relativity predicts. Thus, the spinning top generated a much more powerful gravitomagnetic field than expected.
EU scientist proves GR wrong

Yes Einstein predicted quantum gravitic effects, but in tiny doses. That is what the "alien scientist" is saying in the youtube right? Trying to equate magnetism to gravity with the moving electrons through space...except we substitute mass for electrons and move that through space creating some sort of gravity effect.

I believe the scientists were astounded because while Einstein's predictions were wrong, although they are still correct as far as practicality is concerned. One-hundred millionth the force of gravity is nothing.

If you could strengthen that effect using what Dr. Ning Li described as "aligning ions in a Bose-Einstein condensate" then well who knows...

And I am aware that furrytexan has a thread on the "missing" Dr. Ning Li. I have never commented in that thread, although I have meant to on many an occasion!

Again, my thoughts are that this gravity shielding claim has been around for awhile now. It's one thing to whisk one scientist away to an underground DOD lab. But the cat was out of the bag when NASA announced some funding towards this endeavor. If there was real potential here, I would think it would be sweeping the (US, EU, Russian, Chinese, Japanese, etc) scientific community by storm.

A secret is kept by 1 person. Once Fouche and the alien scientist leak this 89% mass reducer to the world wide web, it wouldn't take long for the secret to get out.



posted on Jul, 8 2010 @ 05:44 PM
link   
"Antigravity" is really a term we tend to apply to just about any 'flight' or propulsion system that seems to defy gravity, and does not immediately resemble our own methods of flight (aerodynamics, which utilize the atmosphere; and ballistic trajectories that can only 'fly' when not hindered by an atmosphere and given enough energy).

To that end - a force does not have to be actual anti-gravity (or have anything to do with it). A 'universal attractor' would work fine. So would a 'universal repulsor.' If you could somehow alter material properties to be magnetic in nature - a magnetic field could easily mimic the effects of gravity (but, oddly enough, it doesn't work that way).

I'll read through some of the things posted here - they certainly sound interesting and, while they may not be 'antigravity' - may still yield some type of useful force or method of altering mass (which would, in some sense, be 'antigravity' - very useful in any case).

I'm not saying anyone has yet proposed a sensible theory for how they may work - but if they work, they work - our understanding is not a prerequisite for their function and utility to exist.



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 11:17 PM
link   
I know this isn't the alien/UFO forum, but you adv aircraft project types might really get a kick out of the book "Unconventional Flying Objects." It was written by Paul R. Hill, a gentleman who did cutting edge research for NACA/NASA from 1939-1970.

He hypothesized that saucers must use some sort of repulsive force field that acts on all matter. He made his case using observations of saucer illumination, silent subsonic operation, silent supersonic operation, heating at great speeds, and high acceleration loading on occupants. Of course, how such a force is generated or if it exists is just speculation.

Another idea to simulate anti-gravity would be monopoles. The existence of monopoles is predicted by the latest big bang theories. The density of monopoles in nature could have diluted as the universe aged, and thus why scientists have never observed monopoles in a lab. However, future civilizations might be able to use some sort of "magnetic net" to collect them in space, and make them very useful.



posted on Nov, 6 2010 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by loner007
Anti gravity lol dont make me laugh. I too once thought it was possible then I realised how absurd the idea was.
There are 4 forces in nature that make up the universe and those are the strong and weak nuclear force electromagnetism and gravity.
Now lets think this logically shall we? If anti gravity was real then it stands to reason the same can be said of the other 3 forces.

There should be an anti weak and strong nuclear force and an anti electromagnetism force.
Now lets think of the implications of such things lets take anti electromagnetism. If such a thing exists then anything entering the field would immediately break down into atoms as electromagnetism is the force that bonds atoms together.
Now an anti strong nuclear force would break any atom into protons and neutrons that would have formed the nucleus of an atom.

It is clear that this types of fields are impossible if you think about it and it is only logical the same can be said of gravity.

So in other words you can only have gravity modification effects not anti gravity


As you have failed to read the beginning of the op then your point is invalid. This is because in Einsteinian Physics gravity isn't even seen as a force, it is seen as a displacement in a four dimensional fabric called spacetime.(Which if you didn't know wasn't proposed by Einstein but his mentor Minkowski.)

The sole purpose of negative mass is to raise the displacement caused by a certain amount of matter. This is referred to anti gravity. Not the negation of gravity but the absence of it. I do think it could be CONSIDERED a negation because you are canceling out the field that is already present, but it is much more proper to call it anti gravity.(Because of the negative mass.)





new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join