Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion General Science Discussion Forum Anti-Gravity

Thanks dkv, Although I don't agree 100% with this quote, I thought you'd like it.

"If all mathematics disappeared, physics would be set back by exactly a week." -- Richard Feynman

Have a great day, I'm going to.
I'm supervising six guys pouring my basement floor. 60 tons of stone and 30 cubic yards of concrete. Three of the guys don't speak English. Gonna be a blast. Hope they don't get pissed off and bury me in the mess.

Have a good day.
That was an honest quote.Takes away much {del} from the subject.

are magnetic fields just as large in vacums?

Again a question which doesnt go with the Topic.
Second your question is weird unless you have just taken up the course.

There is a very single method for get antigravity and you can see that phenomena appears not only at very short distance and you can genarate antigravity en long scale in more space, please make the following experiment:

1) Charge a sphere at a minimal voltage of 1,5 Mega Volt DC in vacuum

2) You can see a SHIFT of the gravity vector in cuadrature for the magnetic earth pole orientation

3) Now you can approach a external magnet an see the gravity vector change and the sphere moves with high force in cuadratura as such magnet poles

With this single experiment you can see antigravity is single and can be generated for a special electric and magnetics fields and see that gravity is a special way of electromagnetism and the unification very single

More questions to my email:

gigawattgratis@123mail.cl

There is a very single method for get antigravity and you can see that phenomena appears not only at very short distance and you can genarate antigravity en long scale in more space, please make the following experiment:

1) Charge a sphere at a minimal voltage of 1,5 Mega Volt DC in vacuum

2) You can see a SHIFT of the gravity vector in cuadrature for the magnetic earth pole orientation

3) Now you can approach a external magnet an see the gravity vector change and the sphere moves with high force in cuadratura as such magnet poles

With this single experiment you can see antigravity is single and can be generated for a special electric and magnetics fields and see that gravity is a special way of electromagnetism and the unification very single

REP: HAHAH.. you are saying it can be generated...Curvature of Sapce Time must account for all the Forces if Einstein is correct...
So your experiment is nothin but the expression of this simple idea...And it is obvious that the generated Dimensional Explanation is a direct result of Quamtum States (Charges,Spins etc)
What I am saying is little more weird..It says that if go deep inside the Atom you find a Quantum Gravitational State which is essentially Anti-Gravitational i.e it Doesnt allow Singularity to Happen..even if the particle has no Charge on it.

And now since you have shown interest ...
let me share some more facts:
Gravity as Explained By Einstein Ignored the Spin..
With Spin you have one more "Force" which results in Frame Dragging.
The unified field has many more "Forces"...
We distinguish them based on thier Quantum Description.
Anti-Gravity results in the balooning of the Mathematical Groups and the Groups are lost.

The elements up to and including Uranium occur in Nature. The one beyond that have all been made in laboratories using various "atom smashing" techniques. They are called "trans-uranic" elements, and many of them are so unstable they have halflives in milliseconds. Just long enough to leave a trace that can be measured.

I hope that helps.

Atom does not have the usual electrons orbiting around its nucleus. They form enegry Bands of Stable and Non-Stable type for a given Entropy..
As the size of Atom increases the influence of Nucleus gets shielded.And after a good large distance the electrons leave the parent to mix band(probability distribution) with the enviroment .. The Nuclear Short Distance Forces loose their control and the Atom Splits.Thus making the Atom Unstable.
But it is still possible to increase the life by reducing Entropy ....the same charges can leave together for a longer time.
But why do you want build such a Atom when you have so many wonderful compounds?

Atom smashing has been happening everywhere.Its just that we know ourselves as the only feasible doers.Which is obviously not correct.

The suggestion of anti-gravity would inevitably cause havoc in the world of physics. We are still in search of the final theory, the grand unified theory that will unify quantum mechanics and general relativity.

Quantum mechanics supports anti-matter, anti matter itself behaves like normal matter. Anti-gravity I assume, means repulsion. So the closer you get to a star with anti-matter the stronger repulsion?

If the total energy in the universe is zero (because according to a theory, matter is positive energy, while the gravitational attraction is negative energy) then would that not imply that this anti-gravity is also positive energy? And that energy itself would be mass?

I will risk the wrath of the informed to comment on this subject once more,

The consensus appears to be among academics interested that there is no solid explanation for gravitation. We consider it to be an attractive force and have no data to show it as a repulsive force, and in short we can not fully explain why mere Mass should create gravitational effects. So let?s wander a little.

The only common place effect that does not require electric or magnetic input for providing both repulsive and attractive force is static. No electrical factor is required. By the rubbing or provision of friction objects, non-metal included, will be attracted or repulsed when the atom gains or loses particles.

http://www.school-for-champions.com/science/staticexpl.htm

Why could not the surface area of solar objects be a source of the production of attractive forces as a result of the rotation in space? Since static attraction can be reversed to be a repulsive force we would have the effect of anti-gravitation because it is not ?gravitation? at all but a manifestation of what we call static electricity (not electricity at all). Don?t freak out on this.

To Amaranth, this is why the plates move.

jjw

jjw004 wrote:
"The consensus appears to be among academics interested that there is no solid explanation for gravitation. We consider it to be an attractive force and have no data to show it as a repulsive force, and in short we can not fully explain why mere Mass should create gravitational effects. So let?s wander a little."

You've already wandered too far already. There is absolutely solid evidence and explanation for gravity as a repulsive force.

Unfortunately not nearly as repulsive as people running on about things on which they've been too lazy to read a good book or a copy of Scientific American.

There is absolutely solid evidence and explanation for gravity as a repulsive force.
REP: Ask Uncle AI .. it is Gravitation and Not Gravity..
Anti Gravity is a State opposite to Gravity.... It acts on the pure Information of Space-Time...Its meaning is relevant to pure attracting power as it is to pure Repulsive Power(not consisting of anyhting but information)
As we knonw piece of Knowledge is not called Knowledge ...in this domain Natural Groups are lost....just as once the Driving is learnt it looses its mention for a long time to come.But the event happened in past,once you didnt know how to drive...thus the unleanred state of existence is lost.This behaviour is called Anti-Gravity(it is in past) but Its progressive.. The Unlearned Past thus runs away. Unless we choose otherwise.
Thats how Anti-Gravity and Gravtiy React..
Intereference of past(reflex) in Future is thus possible.(but not reverse)..Ideally there should be no interference with Presnt But the Nature Of Gravity and AntiGravity results in occasional scaled Uncertainities.... Limited by the Limit of Finitely Observable Dimesional Configurations.
Everything gets solved.. Till I forget the Problem? The Problem is in the Past(because of the limited information) and not in present...
Thus histrionic explanations are limited in Truth because of Information Loss... Do we know that All the Battles are taking place because the right answer is not known.
=========================================
We should realize this.

dvk wrote:
"Anti Gravity is a State opposite to Gravity"

No ... no ... and no!

Gravity, as understood by physics, is a force. It can be attractive or repulsive or, and we have ample evidence, it can be both.

That is one force that can be either attractive or repulsive. There is no evidence of, nor need for, antigravity which is the stuff of fiction.

DA you are the webs sites theory police. Proof and theory is not the same thing to me.

http://www.faqs.org/docs/Newtonian/Newtonian_198.htm.

I do not have time now to review all comments on your repulsive gravity.

"The case for an accelerating expansion has however been
nailed down by high-precision mapping of the dim, sky-wide afterglow of
the Big Bang, known as the cosmic microwave background. Some theorists
have proposed reviving Einstein?s cosmological constant to account for the
acceleration, while others believe it is evidence for a mysterious form of
matter which exhibits gravitational repulsion. The generic term for this
unknown stuff is ?dark energy.? Some recent ideas on this topic can be
found in the January 2001 issue of Scientific American, which is available
online at
http://www.sciam.com/issue.cfm.issueDate=Jan-01"

?Some believe? or think something is true is not as convincing as you are wont to argue; not to me.

jjw

jjw:
Both your links came up 404: file not found. Care to try again?

"Amaranth"

jjw004 comes up 404 too.

The idea that gravity is both attractive and repulsive is a good 100 years old and was originally conceived of by Einstein with his now infamous 'mistake' regarding the cosmological constant.

That jjw004 is not aware of this can only be because he either is not interested in reading any book or article on the subject or he ascribes to the belief that using one's brain is to use a limited resource.

DA Morgan degrades jjw comments:
?You've already wandered too far already. There is absolutely solid evidence and explanation for gravity as a repulsive force.

Unfortunately not nearly as repulsive as people running on about things on which they've been too lazy to read a good book or a copy of Scientific American.?

DA, where is your absolute proof. You present theories as if we found repulsive gravity in our back yard and have been using it for years. It must do serious harm to your ego to see a view point by a member that does not conform to your theories. You are advancing theories ? just theories ? and using them like a sword to get your way.

If these links do not work I have no explanation for it. I think they PRESENT THEORY.

I am willing to accept that there may be such a thing as repulsive gravity even though Einstein was hesitant about the idea. I am not willing to accept the argument that it is proven fact for a hundred years or more.

Repulsive Gravity
Repulsive Gravity & the Cosmological Constant ... Outline. Observational Evidence;
repulsive gravity in General Relativity; Inflation ...
bustard.phys.nd.edu/Phys171/lectures/repulse.html - 14k - Cached - Similar pages

*Evidence for Repulsive Gravity
10.6*Evidence for Repulsive Gravity. Until recently, physicists thought they
understood gravity fairly well. Einstein had modified Newton?s theory, ...
www.faqs.org/docs/Newtonian/Newtonian_198.htm - 11k - Cached - Similar pages

Christopher Hirata's E-Home
... so repulsive gravity became at least a theoretical possibility. Einstein himself
was the first to suggest that repulsive gravity actually existed. ...
www.princeton.edu/~chirata/mmr/m020701.html - 7k - Cached - Similar pages

Edge: THE INFLATIONARY UNIVERSE
The basic idea behind inflation is that a repulsive form of gravity caused the
universe to expand. General relativity from its inception predicted the ...
www.edge.org/3rd_culture/guth02/guth02_print.html
This last item recites in part:

?The basic idea behind inflation is that a repulsive form of gravity caused the universe to expand. General relativity from its inception predicted the possibility of repulsive gravity; in the context of general relativity you basically need a material with a negative pressure to create repulsive gravity. According to general relativity it's not just matter densities or energy densities that create gravitational fields; it's also pressures. A positive pressure creates a normal attractive gravitational field of the kind that we're accustomed to, but a negative pressure would create a repulsive kind of gravity. It also turns out that according to modern particle theories, materials with a negative pressure are easy to construct out of fields which exist according to these theories. By putting together these two ideas ? the fact that particle physics gives us states with negative pressures, and that general relativity tells us that those states cause a gravitational repulsion ? we reach the origin of the inflationary theory.?

Much the static attraction and repulsion work?

jjw

jjw004 asks:
"where is your absolute proof"

www.google.com
Criterion: "Cosmological Constant" and "Repulsive Gravity"

It might be useful here to point out to you that some of the links you provided are about this very same material. So perhaps, see below, the issue here is that English is not your first language.

I'd recommend books, articles, periodicals, etc. but it appears that reading print materials isn't your thing.

Finally jjw004 writes:
"Much the static attraction and repulsion work?"

I'd really like to try responding to this inquiry but, alas, it is not written in English.

Anti Gravity is a State opposite to Gravity"
No ... no ... and no!
Gravity, as understood by physics, is a force.
REP: Gravity as described by Einstein is not a Force but a pure Absolute Field with Gravitational Waves to account for the changes it experiences...But this forces the Theory to exist in the background of Gravitational Wave.
Which makes the theroy non-Absolute.(Ever thought that you are looking at the History of Universe and you are finding yourself alive!!)
So what do we do ?
We increase the Dimensions..by taking in account the Charges and Spin.
Making the Background Thinner and thinner still.
With occasional glimpse of Stationaryness.
A theory without any Background is practically possible to the extent of Information Stability State of Dimension & States.
Thus the next lesson is that The Absolute Background exists for a finite period of time.
And the Background also exists for a finite period of time.This oscialltion of Background and Absolute Background creates Time.
Now we see that what is meant Anti Gravity.
Anti-Gravity makes the Absolute Background a Background.So Gravity realtes to matter and
Anti-Gravity relates only to Waves.Wave spread away from Source.
This restates the fact any random m-theroy Dimension and States can not be reconfigured to an produce a Event .A set of preferred Dimensions and State combinations exists to make it happen.
==============================================
It can be attractive or repulsive or, and we have ample evidence, it can be both.
REP: You just need to read again.I am better than you... trust me.:-))
=======================================
That is one force that can be either attractive or repulsive.
REP:Force or Police Force look up the book sake of Einstein and Feyman (Feyman in my opinion was also as great as Einstein)
=======================================
There is no evidence of, nor need for, antigravity which is the stuff of fiction
REP: Ignore it at your own cost of getting de-evolved.;-))
=======================================
The idea that gravity is both attractive and repulsive is a good 100 years old and was originally conceived of by Einstein with his now infamous 'mistake' regarding the cosmological constant.
REP: Eintein never made a Mistake ... He failed to understand Qunatum Mechanics.It was a German thought Vs. German Thought.Hesienberg and Einstein were poles apart in their thoughts and beliefs but both admitted that they fail to understand each other.
===========================================
That jjw004 is not aware of this can only be because he either is not interested in reading any book or article on the subject or he ascribes to the belief that using one's brain is to use a limited resource.
Brain: I am more powerful than you think.

For DA Morgan:

The line you enjoyed to ridicule should have been capable of interpretation by some one of your assumed intellect. ?Much ?like- the static attraction and repulsion work.? Don?t try to reason it through, it is beneath you.

Your approach to an interchange of ideas is to try to demean and belittle any one that you disagree with. To be fair I went back to the WEB to see what was being said about the Cosmological Constant and Repulsive Gravity. There was nothing new, just more theoretical discussion with some expectation on the part of the authors that a conclusion on the values may eventually be reached and be provable and workable. While you seem to confuse fact, fiction and theory, I recognize theory when I see it and you live in the world of theory as if it was fact.

I can not get angry with your silly tirades because I find them humorous. OTOH your offerings completely lose any supposed merit when reduced to insulting babble. Loosen up.
jjw