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.
Blue Shift
I solved the anti-gravity problem in my 20's but wouldn't you know it the evil government run by the gas companies stole it from me and now has it under lock and key. I solved it by having a quason field block the transdimensional component of ordinary matter. Turns out that gravity is just matter "falling" into a dimension that is at "right angles" to our ordinary three (four) dimensional spacetime. The effect is such that it appears that matter "falls into itself." The quason field -- generated fairly efficiently via Von Klein reaction -- slightly re-orients matter so that it's not aligned with the gravity dimension. Mass and volume are maintained, but it can't fall down the gravity hole.edit on 14-3-2014 by Blue Shift because: (no reason given)
Nochzwei
Blue Shift
I solved the anti-gravity problem in my 20's but wouldn't you know it the evil government run by the gas companies stole it from me and now has it under lock and key. I solved it by having a quason field block the transdimensional component of ordinary matter. Turns out that gravity is just matter "falling" into a dimension that is at "right angles" to our ordinary three (four) dimensional spacetime. The effect is such that it appears that matter "falls into itself." The quason field -- generated fairly efficiently via Von Klein reaction -- slightly re-orients matter so that it's not aligned with the gravity dimension. Mass and volume are maintained, but it can't fall down the gravity hole.edit on 14-3-2014 by Blue Shift because: (no reason given)
hilarious.
Gravity is as yet. little understood by science.
Now to add gravity on to the spacecrafts is a tall order
and beyond the realm of conventional science
stormbringer1701
LUXUS
We cannot give anti-gravity to the world, people are not ready and will abuse the technology what we will give them instead is inertial propulsion, its cruder but will suffice for their needs.
this statement about antigravity is probably the most true. it could be like giving hyper-megaton nuclear bomb to every idiot, terrorist, tyrant, psychotic or maladroit or drunk or high person on earth. billions and billions of people with bombs that can end the world. I don't think if gravity tech is really as powerful as we think it can ever become public access technology. not even any government should have it. not even mine. look how well they keep secrets. atomic bomb: stolen immediately after world war 2. some low rent contractor recently stole hundreds of thousands of secrets. and some punk PFC did the same thing in the army before this jerk. and the Chinese practically bought the secrets of the W54 mini nuke from a corrupt administration a few decades ago.
It would have to be held by a very small guild of trustworthy souls.
edit on 14-3-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: typoedit on 14-3-2014 by stormbringer1701 because: (no reason given)
stormbringer1701
She got the Rossi treatment from the skeptics. if their claims are true she stole money from the project and absconded back to china to avoid prosecution. so she has the fraud cloud hang over her work even if the work is legit.
i did not say that she didn't embezzle. i said that this is used regardless of the legitimacy of her science- remember she had partners and also that she was not the only one to propose the same sort of thing; to discredit the science. and that is wrong no matter what she did.
Bedlam
stormbringer1701
She got the Rossi treatment from the skeptics. if their claims are true she stole money from the project and absconded back to china to avoid prosecution. so she has the fraud cloud hang over her work even if the work is legit.
She did. It's not a matter of conjecture. She took the funding for building a prototype and spent it on things other than building a prototype.
lonegurkha
I find gravity to be a very interesting topic.I was thinking about it the other day when something occured to me.
When I was in school,which was admittedly many years ago, we were taught that gravity extends in all directions from a mass. Hense the reason that people in certain areas of the earth don't fly off. However solar systems like our own seem to have planets orbiting mostly in a plane around the middle of the star at the center of the system.
My thoughts at the time were, is gravity strongest in a directional plane eminating from the center of mass of the system? I wonder if any scientists who may be researching gravity have considered this?
Why don't planets orbit around the poles of a star. I am not aware of any examples of this. It must be possible as we have satillites in polar orbits. So clearly gravity works for polar orbits. Not really sure what to make of this. Struck me as rather odd.
Maybe it has something to do with the gravity interaction of the other planets.
Bedlam
stormbringer1701
She got the Rossi treatment from the skeptics. if their claims are true she stole money from the project and absconded back to china to avoid prosecution. so she has the fraud cloud hang over her work even if the work is legit.
She did. It's not a matter of conjecture. She took the funding for building a prototype and spent it on things other than building a prototype.
bobs_uruncle
reply to post by stormbringer1701
There would be no additional tidal forces that I am aware of since all parts of the device would be traveling at basically the same speed. The bigger problem is micro meteors, even motionless dust become projectiles at high speeds.
Cheers - Dave
Laykilla
As far as I know, this IS absolute conjecture based on rumor from an email sent by Dr. Baker to an independent researcher, who also received a second email from Dr. Baker that might implicate Dr. Baker's first email as less than truthful.
The only truth we know is that the idea that she "took the money and ran" came from a third party and is merely "hearsay." After making this statement, he [Dr. Baker] went on to say he still eats dinner with her husband [Li's]... She also popped back up two years after the alleged "embezzlement" as co-chairwoman of a conference she held for AC Gravity in 2003.
Defacto debunking the embezzlement theory.
It's also important to note that she started AC Gravity, and somebody renewed ACG's business license repeatedly in the amount of time she's "missing." As of 2014, it's still listed as an "Existing" business. Without renewing the license, this is impossible. There is no evidence that suggests that she sold ACG to a new owner, thereforeby insinuating that she indeed herself, has renewed the license.
This part is speculation, but it would stand to reason that she did complete the prototype in secret and that it's also classified due to reasons of national security. The fact that she is still publicly "missing" eludes to the fact that she most likely is part of an on going "top secret" program.
How is this not speculation and conjecture again?edit on 15-3-2014 by Laykilla because: (no reason given)
Laykilla
bobs_uruncle
reply to post by stormbringer1701
There would be no additional tidal forces that I am aware of since all parts of the device would be traveling at basically the same speed. The bigger problem is micro meteors, even motionless dust become projectiles at high speeds.
Cheers - Dave
This is why "forcefields" are actively being researched. We can see low level concepts in applied sciences today with anti-missile systems on tanks.
If you had a perimeter field that pushed micro dust away or deflected micro meteors before they could ever even touch the hull, this becomes a non-issue.
Space flight is complicated, but nothing has ever been proven too complicated to be done. It's just such a massive puzzle that it'll take a long time to get there [or maybe we've been there already, just not publicly.]edit on 15-3-2014 by Laykilla because: (no reason given)
stormbringer1701
i did not say that she didn't embezzle. i said that this is used regardless of the legitimacy of her science...
Bedlam
stormbringer1701
i did not say that she didn't embezzle. i said that this is used regardless of the legitimacy of her science...
Oh, don't get me wrong, I definitely think she was onto something. But yeah, she took the prototype money and lived off of it while she did a lot of theoretical work. Then I'm pretty sure (although there's no proving it) that she hightailed it home with her info. And China's really interested in it.
stormbringer1701
you every notice that the bulk of anti-gravity or gravity modification or gravity synthesis experiments all have certain similarities in their set up. i mean the establishment scientists or scientists with mainstream acceptable credentials, and the fringers and "kooks" all do the same sort of things in their experimental protocols to get their results even if those results are disputed. there really are only a few outliers that try different approaches.
Laykilla
bobs_uruncle
reply to post by stormbringer1701
There would be no additional tidal forces that I am aware of since all parts of the device would be traveling at basically the same speed. The bigger problem is micro meteors, even motionless dust become projectiles at high speeds.
Cheers - Dave
This is why "forcefields" are actively being researched. We can see low level concepts in applied sciences today with anti-missile systems on tanks.
If you had a perimeter field that pushed micro dust away or deflected micro meteors before they could ever even touch the hull, this becomes a non-issue.
Space flight is complicated, but nothing has ever been proven too complicated to be done. It's just such a massive puzzle that it'll take a long time to get there [or maybe we've been there already, just not publicly.]edit on 15-3-2014 by Laykilla because: (no reason given)
actually if felber and hilbert are correct you impart up too twice your energy (the caveat here is: you cannot get it to go above C) via the hilbert effect. also it takes a tiny amount of energy to nudge something out of the way assuming you can impart it far enough away for the vector to clear your front. according to research just painting a earth impacting asteroid white on one side is enough to deflect a full on asteroid millions of miles away from intercept point. so photon pressure differences are enough. Another caveat to the hilbert felber effect though; is your mass is a lot less than a star or a planets so likely your own velocity would suffer appreciably if Hilbert's effect was used.
bobs_uruncle
Laykilla
bobs_uruncle
reply to post by stormbringer1701
There would be no additional tidal forces that I am aware of since all parts of the device would be traveling at basically the same speed. The bigger problem is micro meteors, even motionless dust become projectiles at high speeds.
Cheers - Dave
This is why "forcefields" are actively being researched. We can see low level concepts in applied sciences today with anti-missile systems on tanks.
If you had a perimeter field that pushed micro dust away or deflected micro meteors before they could ever even touch the hull, this becomes a non-issue.
Space flight is complicated, but nothing has ever been proven too complicated to be done. It's just such a massive puzzle that it'll take a long time to get there [or maybe we've been there already, just not publicly.]edit on 15-3-2014 by Laykilla because: (no reason given)
Now, let's say you are traveling at 99.99% C. You have to move everything else out of the way at 99.999% C or higher. Imagine the energy requirements to move one hundred 500gram objects, which wouldn't even be close to what would be actually encountered, in a linear 12 light year journey to say Barnard's Star. Depending on your final speed close to C, the energy required to move objects out of the way could easily exceed the total energy of the universe.
Cheers - Dave
you aren't aiming at a planet though nor the star heaven forbid. you probably want to arrive outside the farthest limit of the star system in question then use low sublight to get to points of interest. the neat thing is you can use a very energy efficient plasma sail to slow down in addition to your main thrusters. the sail is actually inflated by the solar wind itself so your energy contribution is very small. maybe 100KW or even less. the rest is provided by the star and your sail will grow up to about 100 km diameter. imagine a sail like that slowing you down. as a bonus it acts as a radiation shield and a dust and grit and maybe even pea gravel deflector. it gives 100 KMs for stuff to move out of the way in.
Jukiodone
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
Seems a sensible conclusion.
Meanwhile you arrive at your destination at 99.9% of C and ...it takes you so long to accelerate (de-celerate sic) to a speed where you can exit the craft safely, you overshoot it by 10 AU's.
Jukiodone
reply to post by bobs_uruncle
Seems a sensible conclusion.
Meanwhile you arrive at your destination at 99.9% of C and ...it takes you so long to accelerate (de-celerate sic) to a speed where you can exit the craft safely, you overshoot it by 10 AU's.