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 theory of gravity does not require mass!

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 10:45 AM
link   

new theory of gravity does not require mass!


www.physorg.com

In their analysis, the scientists found that a key characteristic of Eddington’s revised theory of gravity is that it reproduces Einstein gravity precisely in the vacuum conditions (with no matter), but it produces new effects when matter is added. Due to this characteristic, the revised theory has implications especially for high-density regions, such as in the very early Universe or within a black hole. For instance, the theory predicts a maximum density of homogeneous and isotropic space-time, which could have implications for black hole formation.
(visit the link for the full news article)

 


Mod Edit : replaced snippet of source article. Please use actual source material within the exnews tagged snippet.


[edit on 8/13/2010 by JacKatMtn]




posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 10:45 AM
link   
This is most promising!
THE CHANCE OF ANTI-GRAVITY BECOMMING A PRACTICAL REALITY HAS SO MANY BENEFITS TO HUMANITY IT WOULD FOREVER CHANGE OUR WHOLE UNIVERSAL PARAMETERS!
iT HAS LONG BEEN APARENT WE HAVENT GOT THE RIGHT SLANT ON THE INNER WORKINGS OF THIS BASIC FORCE OF THE THREE DIMENSIONAL UNIVERSE......
There was a Canadian scientist working on this in 1953-64 named Wilbur Smith.
He had help he claimed, from an alien named affa, who was aloft in a space ship and who communicated with him through telepathy.
(that is an intriguing story in itself and contains enough evidence to be convincing.)
The upshot was that he built a machine which delivered more power than was put into it.
The extra power was not sufficient to make the thing economically viable at the time, but he did perfect it and it was siezed after his death by the canadian govt.
It was his contention that gravity and magnetism are inextricably entwined....

www.physorg.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

(DOI:10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.011101)


[edit on 13-7-2010 by stirling]



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 11:14 AM
link   
I will get excited when they remove the word theory from the title.

We have had lots of theories that have simply enslaved us all.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Did I miss something?
I clicked on the source and nowhere to be read were the words loophole and anti-gravity, so why am I reading that on OP's snippet?

I think someone here made a serious misinterpretation of the following statement:


In their analysis, the scientists found that a key characteristic of Eddington’s revised theory of gravity is that it reproduces Einstein gravity precisely in the vacuum conditions


No, that does not mean you can create gravity in vacuum, that only means the theory can support Einstein's model.

[edit on 13-7-2010 by daniel_g]



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 12:09 AM
link   
reply to post by daniel_g
 


selective quoting the sentence, you gave only the first half of it!
heres the complete statement

Eddington’s revised theory of gravity is that it reproduces Einstein gravity precisely in the vacuum conditions (with no matter), but it produces new effects when matter is added.

get the drift?



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 12:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by zroth


I will get excited when they remove the word theory from the title.

We have had lots of theories that have simply enslaved us all.


I couldn't agree more...

pretty sure the theory a long time ag was that the earth was flat, and anyone that spoke out against this was deemed a heretic by the church.

personally I think there are alot of flaws in both modern science and religion.

but we're each entitled to our own opinions.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 01:06 AM
link   
I'm wondering if they are thinking the same thing I have been. Gravity is just a result of the density of space time. Matter usually happens to fall into denser areas ever since the universe began.

Here's a quote of me from
www.abovetopsecret.com...

"Perhaps gravity should not be thought of as a force but an area of greater density of space time. Light and time may flow at a constant rate per given quantity of space time density. At greater densities, light and time will still take the same amount of time relative to us to cross the same quantity of space time. However because there is an area of concentrated space time, light and time will take longer to cross this concentrated area from our perspective."

From what I can tell they are talking about density of space time.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join