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.

 

Anti-Gravity: Solved! (not kidding)

page: 10
24
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by joer4x4
You have to harness gravity first to prove you opposed it. And no one has done that.


and that's exactly what i plan to do.




posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 11:05 PM
link   
Good luck with your project. This may have already been mentioned but I believe someone now deceased in Florida already discovered anti gravity.
rense.com...

From what I saw on TV, this guy determined the frequency a block of stone or granite would vibrate at and then used certain radio frequencies tuned to the correct frequency and applied or aimed it at the physical block.



posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 11:10 PM
link   
reply to post by orionthehunter
 


maybe he did. but did he translate the application into an engine/drive device that can actually plug into and power and guide a vessel with control panels?



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 01:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by mbkennel


I am a scientist. Levitation is basically not the same thing as antigravity.

"anti-gravity", or more precisely metric-engineering would have profound effects on many physical processes. It would alter the effect/appearance of inertia as well as the propagation of electromagnetic waves. It would, literally, look weird.

Levitation without the other effects is a sure sign of something which is not antigravity.


Very few people / and or Institutes are aware of this, if at all.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 03:16 AM
link   
Here's the thing though. To get anti-gravity, you need to be able to produce negative energy. Why is that? Gravity is an artifact of the energy density of matter. Or simply put, matter is self-contained hyper-dense packets of energy. Einstein had it right with E=mc^2

However some of the confusion about how gravity works I think relates to stuff Einstein didn't think was right or important enough, and he reduced or factored those parts out in order to simplify his equations. For the physics work going on at the time, those parts weren't all that important. But to get an idea of the underlying mechanism of gravity, you'd have to roll back those equations and then develop another branch around the stuff that was discarded the first time around. (Personally I think it has to do with the fact that time itself is relative, and most people can't grasp that a second is not a second when it comes under the influence of gravity. The speed of light is considered constant in a vacuum, but curves around anything with a large gravitational field - that should be the biggest clue. The measuring sticks scientists use go "wibbly-wobbly" under certain cases, and are not actually constant. Once aware of that, more interesting things may open up while reworking the math and applying known physics.)

As for the one guy warning to watch your back, there may be some truth to that. Tesla was dabbling in this area and a lot of his stuff was put away off the public record. Other researchers working on stuff that hinted toward proof of negative energy also seem to disappear or go under contract to work on classified stuff. If going on some rumors, some aspect of the technology (scalar?) started in the late 1960s and may have been perfected in black projects worked on by companies like Lockheed in the 1990s. Unlike nuclear technology which has leaked out, this other branch of quantum technology is still considered an ace up the sleeve. And like any tool, it can be weaponized. Particularly if you consider the potential for application in matter-energy-conversion. ("Free" energy is wonderful, but it could make existing nuclear weapons look antiquated.)

So if you're not in it for profit and really about knowledge, then open up all findings and go the public domain route. Put it on the 'net. Don't worry so much about patents. If your research is any good, then others should be able to reproduce it. Those trying to keep the lid on may still hate you for it and work to discredit you, but they wont be able to easily cover up anything you released so far. Yes there's risk in letting a genie out of the bottle (perceptably there are some dangers), but without risk there's no progress either.

The stuff relating to gravity likely isn't acoustics. (Acoustics is a bit of a side track, even if some behaviors are shared.) I think the confusion there has to do with waveforms. The ones you'd be interested in are EM and/or RF. Some of the cymatic stuff also seems to apply to ferro-fluid behavior with solenoids so it's not all bad though. You may also find waveforms and interference patterns have some common behavior with light or electrons - such as scattering (makes sense since those are EM phenomena) and you can rework waves as probability curves and use quantum behavior relationships to describe some of the properties. Some things like the appearance of magnetic field lines seem to appear in distinct steps based on probability.

As for why I think EM research may be key in accessing negative energy? Has to do with certain traits relating to inductance and usually considered a loss. They're described by using complex numbers. A set of which has a value that if squared produces a negative result. If it's used to describe an energy loss, then put in a situation where it can multiply by itself you should also get a negative output. I'd suspect there's another set of (imaginary?) field lines from a solenoid that normally don't interact with space in a way we can readily observe, so they're considered a loss. (But not as heat. Oddly enough if there are any contra-entropic losses in a negative energy producing system it should get cold.)

Then working things backwards... Negative energy can be equated to negative mass. Therefore it should exhibit anti-gravity as a trait. But knowing how much energy is in mass, it's going to take a lot of it unless there's some other loophole.

Not sure if that makes sense or that I'm half crazy in putting some of that stuff together, that'll be up to you and whatever you decide to do. You're likely not the first. Good luck.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by filledcup

Originally posted by joer4x4
You have to harness gravity first to prove you opposed it. And no one has done that.


and that's exactly what i plan to do.


erm... wright brothers?



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by mbkennel

Originally posted by OneManArmy

Originally posted by AlexIR
Levitation is not anti-gravity.

This kind of science requires a lot of physics to be able to do it.

If you try using sound to travel in outer space ... well ... good luck. (hint: vacuum)

My bet on anti-gravity goes on: matter produces gravity - anti-matter produces anti-gravity.


isnt zero point energy a wave inside a vaccuum?


Not really.


and if all matter consists of waves and everything exists in the vaccuum of the universe, doesnt this mean that it may be possible to use waves even in space.


Yes, fundamental particles, such as matter and force carriers like photons do not need any additional substrate through which to propagate. Quantum mechanical particles, as all are, have certain behaviors which in some cases look waveish, and in others, look particleish.

Other facts like conservation laws for fermion number (matter, not light) make them appear to be particleish in most cases, and lack of conservation law for photon number make them appear to be waveish in many cases.


And light is sound at a lower level on the spectrum, that manages to get through the vaccuum ok.
edit on 16-7-2013 by OneManArmy because: (no reason given)


Light is not sound. Light is a fundamental part of physics. Sound requires a substrate of underlying matter and is the collective motion of large numbers of atoms which have mutual short-range interactions. The concept of sound only applies when the wavelength is much larger than interatomic distances.
edit on 16-7-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-7-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)


thank you for your insights.
They are much appreciated.



posted on Jul, 18 2013 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by filledcup
 


So when can we see it in action?



posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 12:52 AM
link   
Lol every1 is happily posting, without realizing that,
yall are already under tptb surveillance



posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Angelic Resurrection
 


What is that?



posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tylerdurden1
What is that?
You missed the threads about NSA monitoring and the yottabyte facility in bluffdale? If someone comes up with real antigravity they (tptb) would want it, but their PhDs can read this thread and tell there's no substance here, so yes this thread could be flagged for review, then dismissed after review.



posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Angelic Resurrection
Lol every1 is happily posting, without realizing that,
yall are already under tptb surveillance


So what, I know full well that TPTB have us under surveillance, especially on sites like this.
Am I supposed to be scared? Am I supposed to buy into the fear mongering of the MSM.
F^%k TPTB they dont scare me, because I dont fear death, I am master of my own destiny.
I am a free man, and my thoughts are my own. No one can take that away from me, and I will die defending that right.



posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by Tylerdurden1
What is that?
You missed the threads about NSA monitoring and the yottabyte facility in bluffdale? If someone comes up with real antigravity they (tptb) would want it, but their PhDs can read this thread and tell there's no substance here, so yes this thread could be flagged for review, then dismissed after review.


They already know what is correct and what is not.

They spread a lot of disinformation to bump off rivals who follow US science blindly.

All I can tell you that anti-gravity is fiction. It is not needed for spaceship propulsion. All talk about anti-gravity is intentional confusion.



posted on Jul, 20 2013 @ 03:01 AM
link   
Matter can travel faster than light.

Light is a wave. Visible light is just part of huge electromagnetic spectrum.

Motion of a particle is not bound to the laws that apply to waves.

A particle can acquire energy in motion - from the background, which is not possible for light.

A charged particle travelling through magnetic fields may acquire or lose energy - and thus speed up or slow down.

The galaxy has many magnetic fields specially around the central disk. A ship can use naturally occurring magnetic fields for boost. There are magnetic fields that span hundreds or thousands of lightyears. So it is possible for a ship to acquire enough energy to travel much faster than speed of light.

However FTL travel can occur only in wide open spaces where there is no fear of collision as such a ship cannot turn. The ship will also need to slow down using the same principle before it enters a solar system.



posted on Jul, 29 2013 @ 12:44 AM
link   
reply to post by filledcup
 


Wow, great post. I have been curious about what could be done with frequencies for a long time.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join