Jump to content
jimmydasaint

Antigravity - Is it Possible?

Recommended Posts

I just wondered about antigravity. What are the possible mechanisms? Are there functional small craft, for example, UAV's, that use these mechanisms to get off the ground at high speeds and are we confusing UAV's with UFO's?

 

On doing a bit of reading, difficult for a non-physicist, I came across the following about the Biefield Brown effect:

 

'The effect relies on corona discharge, which allows air molecules to become ionised near sharp points and edges...Around this electrode, ionisation occurs, that is, electrons are stripped off the atoms in the surrounding medium, they are literally pulled right off by the electrode's charge.

 

This leaves a cloud of positively charged ions in the medium, which are attracted to the negative smooth electrode, where they are neutralized again. In the process, thousands of impacts occur between these charged ions and the neutral air molecules in the air gap, causing a transfer in momentum between the two, which creates a net directional force on the electrode setup...'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biefeld%E2%80%93Brown_effect

 

A modified version of a UAV looks just like a UFO:

enhtbfs.jpg

 

Anybody else with other ideas about antigravity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
'The effect relies on corona discharge, which allows air molecules to become ionised near sharp points and edges...Around this electrode, ionisation occurs, that is, electrons are stripped off the atoms in the surrounding medium, they are literally pulled right off by the electrode's charge.

This is not anti-gravity. Antigravity would involve shielding against gravity or somew how nutralising the gravitational field. This is instead plain old Newtonian "Action/Reaction". As the electcic field acts on the positive ions, it pushes them downwards. This creates a reaction opposite to the ion movment in the device (the electric field and its generators) which pushes them upwards. It is no more Anti-Gravity and Helicopter blades. It just used a different mechanism to push the air downwards (first ionising it and then accelerating them in an electric field).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I accept that. However, is it a possible propulsion mechanism for UAV's? And is it possible to come up with a plausible antigravity mechanism - know of any? Also I wonder why a coil of wire plugged into the mains will rise as if has experienced antigravity? What's the Newtonian explanation?

 

I have also found this about antigravity:

 

'Bose-Einstein and Anti-Gravity

In the 1980s, Ning-Li – a world renowned scientist predicted that if a time-varying magnetic field were applied to superconductor ions trapped in a lattice structure, the ions would absorb enormous amounts of energy. Confined in the lattice, the ions would begin to rapidly spin, causing each to create a minuscule gravitational field.'

 

http://www.scansite.org/scan.php?pid=157

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny (not ha-ha funny) how no links to the peer-reviewed literature are given in that link. Why is that such a hard task? I mean, peer-review was claimed:

 

"Li’s theory has passed through the scientific quality-control peer review process and an HTSD has been constructed, but important technical unknowns remain. "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can say is that she claimed she wanted the device to be for the American people. However since then, apparently she has been 'turned' and may be working for American Defense. I see your point, but if such a device exists, I would not want my rival nations to have it through reading up peer reviewed material.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
However, is it a possible propulsion mechanism for UAV's?

The particular law is Newton's 3rd Law: "Every action has an equal and opposite reaction".

 

The key phrase here is "Equal and Opposite".

 

So to life a vehicle by this method, you would have to push air with an equal force as gravity is pulling on the vehicle.

 

The problem is, that using such a device like this would probably take more energy than using something like a propeller.

 

And is it possible to come up with a plausible antigravity mechanism - know of any?

To create an anti gravity device, you would need to soem how negate gravity.

 

We can do this with the Electromagnetic force as it has both a positive and negative aspect to the field. However, Gravity (as far as we know) only has an attractive field.

 

This makes our ability to manipulate the Gravitational field very limited. So it look like it might actually be impossible for us to create an anti-gravity device as we can not manipulate the gravitational field like we can the electromagnetic field.

 

I have also found this about antigravity:

Actually the article states that it is not anti-gravity at all, so even if this is shown to be true, the it still would not be anti-gravity. :-(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, Li has claimed antigravity by creating a Bose Einstein condensate which then aligns 'its' magnetic field against the Earth's gravitational field (at least this is my opinion of what she claims):

 

'Li explains that as the ions spin they also create a gravito-electric field perpendicular to their spin axis. In nature, this field is unobserved because the ions are randomly arranged, thus causing their tiny gravito-electric fields to cancel out one another. In a Bose-Einstein condensate, where all ions behave as one, something very different occurs...the tiny gravitational effect of each individual atom is multiplied by the billions of atoms in the disc. Using about one kilowatt of electricity, Li says, her device could potentially produce a force field that would effectively neutralize gravity above a 1-ft.-dia. region extending from the surface of the planet to outer space...'

 

http://www.scansite.org/scan.php?pid=157

 

Also see http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1511/is_5_20/ai_54432952

 

If true, this would represent an antigravity device wouldn't you say?

Edited by jimmydasaint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If true, this would represent an antigravity device wouldn't you say?

 

We need references to the original claims in order to evaluate it. Links to vague summaries on websites and in popular magazines don't help so much. Your second link makes it clear that this is a Podkletnov experiment, and nothing to do with BECs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, Li has claimed antigravity by creating a Bose Einstein condensate which then aligns 'its' magnetic field against the Earth's gravitational field (at least this is my opinion of what she claims):

 

'Li explains that as the ions spin they also create a gravito-electric field perpendicular to their spin axis. In nature, this field is unobserved because the ions are randomly arranged, thus causing their tiny gravito-electric fields to cancel out one another. In a Bose-Einstein condensate, where all ions behave as one, something very different occurs...the tiny gravitational effect of each individual atom is multiplied by the billions of atoms in the disc. Using about one kilowatt of electricity, Li says, her device could potentially produce a force field that would effectively neutralize gravity above a 1-ft.-dia. region extending from the surface of the planet to outer space...'

 

http://www.scansite.org/scan.php?pid=157

 

Also see http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1511/is_5_20/ai_54432952

 

If true, this would represent an antigravity device wouldn't you say?

 

If true, it still wouldn't be that simple. If you were to put a wheel half in gravity and half in the canceled gravity area, then it would be a perpetual motion machine, continuously creating energy. Oh, and earth would lose its atmosphere since gravity would not hold it down in that area. So no, that is something quite hard to believe, and even if it were true, the amount of energy the device would require would depend on what is over the area that would have its gravity canceled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We need references to the original claims in order to evaluate it. Links to vague summaries on websites and in popular magazines don't help so much. Your second link makes it clear that this is a Podkletnov experiment, and nothing to do with BECs.

 

Please read the reference to Li's experiment which has everything to do with BEC's. But, I agree, you need to read scholarly articles than vague references on websites. However, this could also be for the purposes of keeping it secret from other countries. It is a tough call.

 

Ning Li is an American scientist best known for her controversial claims about anti-gravity devices. She previously worked at the University of Alabama, but left to form her own company AC gravity LLD.[1]

 

'According to Li, rotating ions create a gravitomagnetic field perpendicular to their spin axis. If a large number of ions could be aligned, (in a Bose-Einstein condensate) the resulting effect would be a very strong gravitomagnetic field producing a strong repulsive force. The alignment may be possible by trapping superconductor ions in a lattice structure in a high-temperature superconducting disc.'

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ning_Li_(physicist)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but wikipedia is not an acceptable substitute. Ions in a BEC? How would one do that with the repulsive forces present?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, but wikipedia is not an acceptable substitute. Ions in a BEC? How would one do that with the repulsive forces present?

 

I guess this would be why this thread is shifted to pseudoscience :doh:

but Li ventures that in a BEC, the ions behave as one 'super ion' which produces a 'gravito electric field' perpendicular to the axis of spin. I am theorising that the ionic repulsion is minimised at low superconducting temperatures but I don't know to be honest. I was just interested in collecting together a fascinating area of science which could come true in the future.

 

Ions seem to be important here to make a BEC:

 

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/maik/10637850/2007/00000033/00000001/00001005

Edited by jimmydasaint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's talking about a superconducting transition in a solid. Bose-Einstein Condensates, as the term is normally understood, are formed from a gas. I was under the impression that superconductivity was a Fermionic state (BCS theory). Even if there is a Bose-Einstein description, it's a poor use of the jargon — we're not talking about the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you. The BCS theory referes to Cooper pairs of electrons but Li's theory seems to suggest that rotating ions trapped in a semiconductor matrix will induce a new force perpendicular to the axis of movement. I should have been more precise with the language but was learning as I went along. Quite interesting though, I have half-learned more concepts as I went along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with you. The BCS theory referes to Cooper pairs of electrons but Li's theory seems to suggest that rotating ions trapped in a semiconductor matrix will induce a new force perpendicular to the axis of movement.

 

And that's why references to scientific papers are desired. As it stands, there is nothing here to separate it from a whole pile of crackpot garbage. A fantastic claim with no evidence or scientific support, just a nebulous explanation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.