+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 18

Thread: antigravity

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    41

    antigravity

    In the 90's, Dr Yevgeny Podkletnov, a Russian scientist working in Finland, attenuated effects of gravity by a small amount (0.3 to 2%) using a rotating ceramic superconductor disk. NASA was somewhat interested but it seems like funding for the effort got cut off. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podkletnov

    Most conventional scientists will say you can't sheild a gravitational field in the same way that you can sheild an electric or magnetic field. If gravitons do exist, their wavelength must be very small since gravity can pass unhindered through millions of miles of matter, e.g. a red giant.

    But what if Podkletnov wasn't stopping gravitons but just changing their phase and the attenuation is a sort of phase cancellation effect? Being in a gravity field is not a problem, if there is some clever way to negate the gravitational force that is generated by the gravitational field.

    I recall reading a comment in the Wired article. Some scientist was saying that a ceramic superconductor is a kind of quantum object that might exert some sort of an effect on a graviton beam.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,324

    Re: antigravity

    Interesting idea, I've never really read anything about interference of gravity waves. A few problems with this idea spring to mind though.

    If, as you mentioned, gravitons must have an extremely short wavelength, then interference effects would be difficult to observe on a macroscopic scale.

    Also, any interference effects would require a coherent source. Terrestrial gravity would be highly incoherent due to the large spatial extent, even if the individual oscillators were coherent to begin with.

    I looked at the wiki article, and while it seems like there may be some cool new effect at work here, it would take a great deal more study to determine whether or not his device is reducing the effects of gravity, or providing some sort of opposing force. eg. Magnetic materials levitate above a superconductor, but that isn't a negation of gravity. I might look up the JPD paper.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    26,288

    Re: antigravity

    if matter is associated with gravity then antimatter might be antigravity!?the question might be,what is matter and what is gravity!?and what is antimatter!?are these all phase related questions!?we know that sound can be cancelled/diminished by = out of phase sound!?could all gravity be explained by black holes!?do all celestial bodies have a black hole as there construction center point!?meaning that the earth has a small black hole at it's center!?did i mention that would mean that black holes are the cause for matter as we know it!?but htis only explains a simple form!?spherical!?how does it cause complex forms!?:spin2: :freak3: : hehe!!.....just askn...
    Last edited by lexx; 07-19-2008 at 09:14 PM.
    i do not endorse/recommend any advertising on scam.com associated with my name /posts or otherwise. thank you

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,324

    Re: antigravity

    Quote Originally Posted by lexx View Post
    if matter is associated with gravity then antimatter might be antigravity!?the question might be,what is matter and what is gravity!?and what is antimatter!?are these all phase related questions!?we know that sound can be cancelled/diminished by = out of phase sound!?could all gravity be explained by black holes!?do all celestial bodies have a black hole as there construction center point!?meaning that the earth has a small black hole at it's center!?:spin2: :freak3: : hehe!!.....just askn...
    Nah. Internal phase symmetries in the electromagnetic field equations give rise to electromagnetic charges, and it's these charges that give rise to the distinction between matter and antimatter, but both matter and antimatter have a positive gravitational and inertial mass.

    Or in simpler terms, matter is made up of positively charged protons and negatively charged electrons. Antimatter is made up of negatively charged protons and positively charged electrons. But all of the above particles have a positive gravitational charge (though I don't think it's a good idea to think of mass as a gravitational charge).

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    26,288

    Re: antigravity

    Quote Originally Posted by kazza View Post
    Nah. Internal phase symmetries in the electromagnetic field equations give rise to electromagnetic charges, and it's these charges that give rise to the distinction between matter and antimatter, but both matter and antimatter have a positive gravitational and inertial mass.

    Or in simpler terms, matter is made up of positively charged protons and negatively charged electrons. Antimatter is made up of negatively charged protons and positively charged electrons. But all of the above particles have a positive gravitational charge (though I don't think it's a good idea to think of mass as a gravitational charge).
    so what explains the absence of any quantity of antimatter!?say enough to end the universes existence!?:spin2: :freak3: : hehe!!.....just askn..
    i do not endorse/recommend any advertising on scam.com associated with my name /posts or otherwise. thank you

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,324

    Re: antigravity

    Quote Originally Posted by lexx View Post
    so what explains the absence of any quantity of antimatter!?say enough to end the universes existence!?:spin2: :freak3: : hehe!!.....just askn..
    NP conservation violation, perhaps.

    That's actually an unanswered question in physics. NP violation only explains part of it, but we really don't know for sure why there is more matter than antimatter.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    41

    Re: antigravity

    Quote Originally Posted by kazza View Post

    Also, any interference effects would require a coherent source. Terrestrial gravity would be highly incoherent due to the large spatial extent, even if the individual oscillators were coherent to begin with.
    Actually, you can observe mild interference effects with non-coherent light if it is monochromatic, e.g. newton rings http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton_rings

    Even with normal daylight, an anti reflective coating on a piece of glass employs interference. What comes to my mind: You might have something like a shadow of very tiny interference fringes coming off an object. A target mass like a silicon cube (non-magnetic) is in this shadow and you are measuring its weight. The effect of the ridges and troughs of the interference pattern within the volume of the cube would average out to zero if their effect were linear. But the effect might be non-linear so that the troughs exert a greater effect than the ridges.

    It is sort of idle speculation I admit.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,324

    Re: antigravity

    Quote Originally Posted by tungs10 View Post
    Actually, you can observe mild interference effects with non-coherent light if it is monochromatic, e.g. newton rings http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton_rings

    Even with normal daylight, an anti reflective coating on a piece of glass employs interference. What comes to my mind: You might have something like a shadow of very tiny interference fringes coming off an object. A target mass like a silicon cube (non-magnetic) is in this shadow and you are measuring its weight. The effect of the ridges and troughs of the interference pattern within the volume of the cube would average out to zero if their effect were linear. But the effect might be non-linear so that the troughs exert a greater effect than the ridges.

    It is sort of idle speculation I admit.
    Lol. Don't know what I was typing in that first reply. Of course the image of the interference effect could be macroscopic, I guess I was thinking of the path difference, which would still need to be tiny.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    838

    Re: antigravity

    Quote Originally Posted by lexx View Post
    if matter is associated with gravity then antimatter might be antigravity!?the question might be,what is matter and what is gravity!?and what is antimatter!?are these all phase related questions!?we know that sound can be cancelled/diminished by = out of phase sound!?could all gravity be explained by black holes!?do all celestial bodies have a black hole as there construction center point!?meaning that the earth has a small black hole at it's center!?did i mention that would mean that black holes are the cause for matter as we know it!?but htis only explains a simple form!?spherical!?how does it cause complex forms!?:spin2: :freak3: : hehe!!.....just askn...
    Interesting points to ponder. Also, would an abundance of antimatter produce a white hole? Instead of sucking in, it would spit out. Perhaps our universe was caused by(is?) a white hole--a black hole turned inside out.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,245

    Re: antigravity

    Quote Originally Posted by lexx View Post
    if matter is associated with gravity then antimatter might be antigravity!?the question might be,what is matter and what is gravity!?and what is antimatter!?are these all phase related questions!?we know that sound can be cancelled/diminished by = out of phase sound!?could all gravity be explained by black holes!?do all celestial bodies have a black hole as there construction center point!?meaning that the earth has a small black hole at it's center!?did i mention that would mean that black holes are the cause for matter as we know it!?but htis only explains a simple form!?spherical!?how does it cause complex forms!?:spin2: :freak3: : hehe!!.....just askn...

    As I understand some of the more recent theories, there are three flavors of gravitons, the particles that carry gravity. Two of them interact identically with matter and antimatter. The third flavor differs, attracting one kind and repulsing the other kind (I think it is matter that is repulsed, but I'm not certain, not having the journals in front of me).

    Under normal conditions, I do not believe the vector particles of gravity or electromagnetism have antiparticles. Those of the weak force apparently do, and theories differ as to whether the gluon (strong force) has anti-gluons or merely gluons with anti-color charges.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,324

    Re: antigravity

    Quote Originally Posted by ProfHenryHiggins View Post
    Under normal conditions, I do not believe the vector particles of gravity or electromagnetism have antiparticles. Those of the weak force apparently do, and theories differ as to whether the gluon (strong force) has anti-gluons or merely gluons with anti-color charges.
    I think you're partially correct there. The electromagnetic field is a vector field, and has anti-particles (positron, anti-proton etc). The Higgs field is a scalar field, and doesn't have any anti-particles.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,245

    Re: antigravity

    Quote Originally Posted by kazza View Post
    I think you're partially correct there. The electromagnetic field is a vector field, and has anti-particles (positron, anti-proton etc). The Higgs field is a scalar field, and doesn't have any anti-particles.

    The positron and anti-proton aren't carriers of the force. One is a lepton (i.e. a quark with a unit charge and no color), the other is a baryon akak nucleon composed of three (anti)quarks and untold hordes of gluons.

    The photon is the carrier particle for electromagnetism.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,324

    Re: antigravity

    Sorry, been a while since I've used QFT, getting all confused. Should have said that the dirac field is complex, hence we have anti-particles, while the Higgs field is a scalar, so we don't expect to find any anti-particles.

    And electrons/positrons can also mediate the electromagnetic force, such as in electron/positron scattering.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,245

    Re: antigravity

    Quote Originally Posted by kazza View Post
    Sorry, been a while since I've used QFT, getting all confused. Should have said that the dirac field is complex, hence we have anti-particles, while the Higgs field is a scalar, so we don't expect to find any anti-particles.

    And electrons/positrons can also mediate the electromagnetic force, such as in electron/positron scattering.

    Where do you see scattering happening without photons being involved?

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    5,324

    Re: antigravity

    Quote Originally Posted by ProfHenryHiggins View Post
    Where do you see scattering happening without photons being involved?
    Oops, again, my mistake (damn, you forget this stuff quickly if you don't use it). I had the Feynman diagram for electron/positron annihilation in my head when I wrote that. Don't know why I thought scattering.

    Hmm, I always avoided particle physics, didn't interest me much at the time, I think now it's starting to show :rasta:

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    1,471

    Re: antigravity

    *I have nothing to contribute to this topic specifically*...But...:spin2:...

    Have you met my Auntie? We call her Auntiegravity...She's sooo flighty...:rain:



    MAPD (mother's against drunk posting) says, "Don't drink and post!" :rotz: yb: !
    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."
    -Hunter S. Thompson

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •