Is the secret of Anti Gravity locked in stone?and Could ATS find it using pure reason and intuitio

reply to post by new_here


I love your thought process on this subject! Along those same lines look at electricity, it conducts thru a lot of materials but there are insulators which it can not penetrate. Radiation can be blocked by really dense materials such as lead and tungsten.

Same as magnetism a lot of natural elements are magnetic but there are exceptions to this. Not to mention the fact that you already stated about cancelling sound out with sound and your other examples. All natural forces have a way counter them, block them, or neutralize them.

Do I believe the ancients had access to some sort of neutralizing force or material.... I doubt it. But I do believe we don't fully understood their methods or technology I'll probably get slammed for saying that but oh well.

So my question is if we have ways to counter, neutralize, block, or manipulate all the other natural forces around us what will the key be to gravity??

Originally posted by CitizenJack
reply to post by new_here

 

I love your thought process on this subject! Along those same lines look at electricity, it conducts thru a lot of materials but there are insulators which it can not penetrate. Radiation can be blocked by really dense materials such as lead and tungsten.

Same as magnetism a lot of natural elements are magnetic but there are exceptions to this. Not to mention the fact that you already stated about cancelling sound out with sound and your other examples. All natural forces have a way counter them, block them, or neutralize them.

Do I believe the ancients had access to some sort of neutralizing force or material.... I doubt it. But I do believe we don't fully understood their methods or technology I'll probably get slammed for saying that but oh well.

So my question is if we have ways to counter, neutralize, block, or manipulate all the other natural forces around us what will the key be to gravity??

Ahh, yes... 'neutralize' was the term I was looking for in my sleepy post! Thanks for providing. Also, I believe in your last sentence!

reply to post by new_here


I believe you are correct in your take on gravity being similar to the electromagnetic force. As well as it not being understood very well. Its such a weak force compared to the others but it influences everything. O

I think exploring the higgs boson is a step in the right direction, but I think its a baby step towards fully understanding mass and gravity. Ive tried to wrap my mind around gravity, is it a wave , is it a particle , or it could be leaking from another dimension www.space.com... . It is perplexing indeed.

My mind would not be blown if they discovered gravity was something completely different altogether than the current understanding.

Originally posted by CitizenJack
reply to post by new_here

 

I believe you are correct in your take on gravity being similar to the electromagnetic force. As well as it not being understood very well. Its such a weak force compared to the others but it influences everything. O

I think exploring the higgs boson is a step in the right direction, but I think its a baby step towards fully understanding mass and gravity. Ive tried to wrap my mind around gravity, is it a wave , is it a particle , or it could be leaking from another dimension www.space.com... . It is perplexing indeed.

My mind would not be blown if they discovered gravity was something completely different altogether than the current understanding.

Gravity, they say, is not as strong on the Moon. Yet my mass would be the same. It definitely must depend on something more than the mass of the object being pulled, right? Otherwise, I'd be effected, gravitationally-speaking, the same on the Moon as on Earth. So, in my mind that's another vote for 'electromagnetic' ...assuming the Earth does indeed have an iron core. What are your thoughts?

This just in[to my brain, lol] :
The Sun has a pull on the Earth. The Earth has enough... whatever... to withstand being sucked in. But us mere mortals... shouldn't the gravitational pull of the Sun suck us off the planet like a vacuum cleaner? When it comes to the Sun's gravitational effects vs. the Earth's ...no contest, right?

Thanks for listening. I know you won't flame me, like some do to people, if I've asked something I ought to know. You've been real nice.

Edit: Another thought. How DOES the Earth withstand the gravitational pull of the Sun? It has, in a sense, a bit of 'anti-gravity' of its own to withstand the incredible pull of our Giant Friend! Does that answer lead to the answer we seek?

reply to post by new_here


Well I cannot claim to be an expert in anything, I think of my self as a great speculator. Im always speculating on things that are , that will be and that have been. My poor brain lol.

But as far as the earth not falling into the sun the key is the speed of the earth its going fast enough to pull away from the gravity of the sun. Think of a tennis ball on a string and spin it really fast around your head the gravity from the sun is the string so to speak. If you cut the string the speed of the ball will make it go flying away. So we are in harmony with the sun.

So to me I rack my brain trying to figure what is that string made of and how do you manipulate it?? Now you dont wanna cut gravity off cuz we will all go flyin away like the tennis ball. But thinking of it as a string like the previous example, if we could manipulate that string and change its properties by making it stretchy or more flexible than we could really get the ball rolling and have some fun.

Garvitic equilibrium is explained by Newton i think
MV2=mv2
in words the mass x the velocity (of the sun)= mass x velocity (of the earth) at this point in space where we we orbit...this is supposedly a law and is true for the earth moon combo as well....as all our satelites....though their orbits deteriorate if the balance is not met, and we see them eventually return to earth the hard way.......
correct if wrong peeple.....

This guy was a long time past and i am wondering if true....then gravity is a field force.....
Magnetism, and gravity are not shieldable......
as far as iknow with our current understanding...they are the only ones.....other than subatomic particles and then only neutrons....(which have no mass)
Sound is a wave which is carried by atmosphere....no atmosphere no sound....
your idea of sound cancelling gravitic field....may be useful, maybe not?
I wonder if you took two sound generators and put them together one making the exact opposite to the other wave length...?
Would the sound be cancelled out yet still affect the atmosphere?
and what side forces could be detected from such an arrangement?

The theory that UFOs ( some) fly in the earths magnetic field by producunig COUNTER FIELDS which are conrolled to be opposite plus extra for flight ....is an interesting idea.....
Though this is sneaky anti gravity and not a true counter force to it...

T Thompson Brown had discs flying years ago this way by electro magnetism i believe....yet not quite opposite earths gravity but some generated EM force....

What to say...?
I love all the speculative answers
BUT the learned (programmed) are always pooing in the punch bowl instead of launching into speculation....it pisses me off somewhat to hear the naysayers...
So anti gravity is too tough for them i guess.....
However this leaves it up to those with speculative minds and no RESTRAINTS to come up with something workable.
I dont really denegrate knowledge here but those who are so so well educated they lost the ability to speculate or think out of the Box.
The world needs those solutions that may never be found in the flawed science of mankind.
(yes we know lots of things that work, and we call them laws but are there exceptions?
if so the laws an ass......
Massless flight is aparent in many UFO reports...right angle turns , instant accelleration etc....
So the example is in front of mortal men...but those who know apear to be blind to the evidence.....


I thank you for the input (please do)keep it comming.....
Also, i would say that everything that exists is build from electricity of some kind.....(electromotive forces at play..)
Therefore shouldnt the ;aws of electromagnetism apply to everything some way?
just running things up the flagpole to see if anyone salutes...
.

Anti-gravity and zero gravity are the same thing; unfortunately neither exist. Zero gravity is a just a free fall that never gets closer to the planets core.

However; we can manipulate the effects of gravity by understanding it. It is a particle, when bound up in mass it adds the property of weight. When free of mass I call the particle dark matter, Ed of Coral Castle called it free magnets; the ancients called it aether. It is also of interest to know that the particle of gravity moves at the same speed as light.

The theory of a multiverse; is more credible and supports physics more than the current accepted theory. If you find a diagram of Keely's Atom; it matches the disk shape of a galaxy and also the massive black hole found at the center of every galaxy...sure it was an atom in this theory, but things on the micro and macro move in the same way according to physics.

It is interesting that you mention locked in stone; Iron is the most abundant element and it just so happens not only does it take on magnetic properties readily, magnetite is an oxide(sort of rust) from iron. Magnetite is naturally occurring and of course magnetic.

We know over time, elements decay...they lose an atom here and an atom there. The magnetite I theorize comes from within the iron itself, as the atoms escape the particle of weight is left behind and forms magnetite. Whereas rust forms from exposure to external elements. Two different oxidation's from one singular element. If you want a comparable think of cell necrosis due to oxidation; the latest buzz in food health is what? antioxidants.

Ok; so how does this all relate to rocks and magnets. Iron being most abundant, magnetite is the second most abundant. What does that mean exactly? Well, it found in virtually every single rock on this planet not sedimentary. Coral castle is of course sedimentary, coral turns into limestone, and limestone eventually turns into dolomite, in other words it is a crystalline structure. Ed S. would have had an easier time moving his structures if the coral wasn't sedimentary...and contained the thousands and thousands of grains of magnetite; that other rocks have.

The problem with latent magnetite...every single pole faces however it formed inside the rock structure. The secret to moving these massive stone blocks...you guessed it; aligning all of the internal little magnetite grain poles into the same direction within the rock. Ed S. conducted many magnetic experiments; in which of course he discovered how to manipulate the particles he called free magnets. Unfortunately, for him the coral contains very little magnetic properties from magnetite. Fortunately for him; crystalline structures can hold a static charge and release them as well...basically you can't lose given the technique.

The technique? Well; align the magnetite if it exists within, and create an electromagnet out of stone. Of course to do this you need electricity; Ed S. used a 12V car battery in the box on top of his lifting tripod, he bored a hole in the stone and wrapped it with metal bands, gave it a charge against the ground charge and used the block and tackle to guide them into place. I suppose the ancients used lighting rods, or rubbed the stones with magnetite all in a singular direction to align the magnetite within it. While on site Ed S. used his hand cranked generator to create the electricity needed. When off site he used a car battery for the charge; if you look very closely at his tripod rigging, you can see the small jumper wires he used that were attached to the battery within the box.

Using electromagnets to levitate objects; is commonly found and known. What Ed S. found was how to do this on a larger scale; He was also confident enough that the process was easy enough to accomplish, that the ancients used the same technique. I am sure this sheds a lot of light; on what those ancient batteries no one seems to understand a use for...now make sense.

All of the previous theories mentioned are mine. I decided to give them freely to ATS to discuss and use; but I would appreciate credit; if any of my theories leave this post. Thank you. Jim Smith; AKA Bigbrotherdarkness.

I can offer you an intriguing text from Sumeria;



That a bird like the raven, performing the work of man, should make the counterweight blocks of the shadouf bump up and settle down; that it should make the counterweight blocks of the shadouf bump down and rise up -- who had ever seen such a thing before?


etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk...

Originally posted by Kantzveldt
I can offer you an intriguing text from Sumeria;



That a bird like the raven, performing the work of man, should make the counterweight blocks of the shadouf bump up and settle down; that it should make the counterweight blocks of the shadouf bump down and rise up -- who had ever seen such a thing before?


etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk...


Hi, are we talking symbolic ufo here? or dyou think its a technical description of some kind?

still chewing on the lengthy post above back later......

Back in physics class in college (probably highschool too) you learn that the force of gravity that an object "feels" is calculated by using the equation G(m1*m2)/d^2 (i think) where G is just some random constant the "m"'s are the masses of two objects that we're talking about and the "d" is the distance between them. There's no magnetic or electric field component anywhere.

When you're working your simple Newtons laws physics problems you always start with a free body diagram. You draw the object you're talking about and then draw an arrow for everything that's pushing or pulling on the object; things like the ground, hands, wind, etc. Then you add up all the arrows and if they all cancel each other out then the object isn't accelerating. If they don't then it accelerates.

When we talk about things orbiting the earth, they are not really in zero gravity. There is still the Earth pulling the object toward it and the object pulling the Earth toward it. Free fall is a more accurate term. You're continually falling toward the Earth, but you're going "sideways" too. It's like continually falling off of the edge. When you're a certain distance from the Earth, you have to go a certain speed to continually fall off the edge without being pulled into the atmosphere first. There are different "shells" around the Earth and at each level or shell or distance there is a specific speed that you need to go to maintain a stable orbit.

It's the same for the other planets. They are all going a different speed that allows them to "fall" over the edge of the Sun before they crash into it. That's why some of the planets can be smaller/bigger and closer/farther than the other ones without falling into the Sun. They're going different speeds.

Now we can already "cancel" gravity. In space there are points where the only appreciable forces that an object would feel would be the pulls from the moon and the Earth (since they're really big and really close). At certain points, called the lagrange points the free body diagrams would show one arrows pulling the object toward the moon from the moon's gravity and another pulling the object toward the Earth. When you add the two arrows up they equal zero and your object doesn't accelerate.

A similar thing happens all the time on Earth. Right now, gravity is pulling you down and the chair is pushing up on you so that, when the two "arrows" are added together they cancel out and your acceleration is zero.


Now, how do we remove the "arrow" that is labeled gravity from our free body diagrams? That's the million dollar question. If we look at our equation for gravity we see that it only has masses and distances. So, we'd have to find a way to remove the masses of the objects (as someone else said). Anything else would just be introducing another force that was strong enough to cancel out the effects of gravity and more. You can do that everytime you do something simple like jumping.

Originally posted by LordGoofus
The secret to anti-gravity is learning how to manipulate the higgs boson. Seeing as it's the cause of mass, if we learn how to strip the higgs boson out of matter, then we've just created anti-gravity in a manner of speaking. To my understanding zero mass would mean gravity would have zero affect on the matter, and it would be ridiculously easy to accelerate it to the speed of light, possibly even beyond the speed of light.

Unfortunately this isn't true. In ordinary matter, most of the mass comes from neutrons and protons, and most of their mass does not come from the Higgs mechanism, but from the mass-energy in the gluon binding.

The Higgs mechanism does explain why electrons, muons and the quarks have themselves non-zero rest mass, but rest mass of composite nucleons is much larger than the sum of the rest masses of their constituent quarks.

Besides, we have no known way to manipulate Higgs field. (The Higgs boson is a side effect of the field, though experimentally it has no effect in the real world).

I suppose; if we are to take this discussion as far as the OP suggests; we should get on the same page with terms, so that we may hammer out details in the same language, to create a better understanding of the concepts. The arrows mentioned are known to myself as vectors. Either way works for me; arrows seems to be the simplest description to grasp that concept.

I pointed out earlier, that Ed Leedskalnin...don't know why abbr. his name with an S. instead of an L. Called the force free magnets, ancients called aether, and myself call it dark matter...looking into the latest posts; this bonded effect can also be termed as gluons/graviton bond they all describe the same thing of sorts gluon to me is when a graviton is trapped/bonded that causes the property of weight in a mass. When a gluon/graviton bond is unbound from mass to me it becomes dark energy, when gravitons bond together it forms dark matter.

Removing the vector/arrow (that another poster mentioned) as the million dollar question has been done; two things have pulled apart the muon bond of gluons/gravitons from mass creating weightless mass...Hadron experiments and the Hutchison effect. Since a lot of this field of research is theory, which has been proven by math; but not accepted until, experiments prove them, repeatedly. Scientists and researchers are going to call these things; by different names until accepted, then a name chosen. That's part of the problem I suppose; any unidentified planetary body becomes planet X, particle theory needs the same thing for clarity sake.

There's no reason we cannot have that here. It would build progress faster; I believe to a mutually agreeable solution. The only reason I question the seriousness of this thread; is the rolling eyes the OP made in a comment...if this was just an experiment the OP does not expect to really go anywhere; I will be happy to take it to a board dedicated to particle physics. But perhaps; it's a just disbelief that the OP is getting what he asked for; an adult group discussion, to arrive at a solution on ATS to solve his query.

I would like to clarify my statement; iron as the most abundant element; it was intended to be in regards to a ferrous element...since magnetism was the topic being discussed; oxygen and aluminum are more abundant but have no place in the description of magnetic properties. Sorry if that threw anyone off of the topic I was attempting to explain with clarity.

reply to post by new_here


Gravity is an expression of One Dimensionality. Now what does than mean? This is what it means.

Our Universe and all forms of Matter and Energy within it must have at a minimum of 10 or 11 dimensional states just to exist. We do not live in a 3 or 4 Dimensional Universe...we live in a 10 plus dimensional Universe.

The Protons and Neutrons that make up the nucleus of most atoms....Hydrogen just has one Proton but tens to exist in nature as H2 a Elemental Molecule...but these atomic nucleus particles are completely comprised of Quantum Particle/Wave Forms such as Quarks, Leptons, Mesons, Gluons...etc..

Thus the particles that have Mass...Protons and Neutrons...are completely made up of energy. This shows us how Matter and Energy are interchangeable or the tenets of the Unified Field Theory. But just because these atomic particles HAVE MASS does not explain why.

Thus we come to the Higgs-Bosson. This is the Quantum Particle/Wave Form that is responsible for giving Protons and Neutrons Mass. These Quantum Wave Functions create this Mass and thus all Mass has the effect upon Space/Time to warp or bend it.

All Mass creates a Gravity Well and a Celestial Body will create a very large one. This Gravity Well is creating as close to a true singularity as possible and given enough Mass a true Singularity...ie...Black Hole will be created.

Singularity is One Dimensionality. Thus the greater the Mass of a Celestial Body...the greater the Gravity Well and the greater the warping of Space/Time. This means you weigh more on Earth than the Moon.

Split Infinity

i believe we have to consider there is/are unknown forces(as yet) acting on all matter and keeping planets in orbit and stars in their vast orbits and galaxies staying on their allotted tracks. there may be a repelling force from the sun which balances out the attractive force. there is much to discover. who would have thought you could cut material with coherent light this time last century(or whenever it was).

but anti-gravity exists in comic books and science fiction so according to history its only a matter of time before we "crack it".
there has to be more than "ball on a string" type theories as the orbits are eliptical. and the ancients had knowledge that we have yet to discover. an example are the "vimanas" from ancient india mentioned in their holy books. they seemed to have gone beyond the primitive "rocket" ideas. there is an english translation of the vimana desription available somewhere. cant remember the name of the book.

google turned this up;-In the Ramayana, the pushpaka ("flowery") vimana of Ravana is described as follows:

"The Pushpaka chariot that resembles the Sun and belongs to my brother was brought by the powerful Ravana; that aerial and excellent chariot going everywhere at will .... that chariot resembling a bright cloud in the sky ... and the King [Rama] got in, and the excellent chariot at the command of the Raghira, rose up into the higher atmosphere.'

its possible that the english translation referred to came from a channeled document early in the 20th century.

in some ancient text the vimana was supposed to be powered by the application of heat to mercury. whether this was induced by electromagnetism is not known. years ago i intuited that an unknown force would be generated by intersecting a dc field with an ac field but i never tried it.
some author suggested the "vril stick" used in construction of ancient egyptian pyramids would neutralize the weight of stones, but the one who wielded it had to be specially mentally trained.

reply to post by orangutang


Refer to Mayson's post above he explains it well; SplitInfinity does as well in different terms...that's part of the problem; the mystery has been solved. Everyone just uses different terms for the same effects in the scientific community as well as here. Get past the self created language barrier of the terms; one will find, that the concepts are the same.

reply to post by stirling


I love what you've done with this OP! There is nothing better than the spirit of cooperation.



So, is "null gravity space" a term that people can relate to better than "anti-gravity"?

Back at last.....
Is anyone familiar with theis guy here?
A capacitor stores electrical charge.........


members.gcronline.com...
earth
is comprised of the positive electro-sphere / ionosphere combination and the negetive earth surface. This "earth - capacitor" is charged to about 300,000 volts with a total surface charge of about 1,000,000 coulombs. Since
this is a very adaquate charge to lift things from the surface...
.why not?[
Could it be possible to build a spherical shaped capacitor that would give sufficient surace area?
editby]edit on 16-12-2012 by stirling because: (no reason given)