Will an anti-gravity device ever be created? What would it involve?

[JamesG]

I'm not even going to justify that with a response, sorry.

Non sequinter.

I guess the absurdity of this arguement has dulled your sense of the sarcastic.

 

[Urwumpe]

How do you know I don't have a superconducting doughnut attached to the end of my cordless drill right now?

Important law in science: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

 

[T.Neo]

I'm not even going to justify that with a response, sorry.

Funny, because you just did so...

 

[TMac3000]

I am going to laugh my head off if this thread gets locked before the current religion thread.

 

[Tex]

Well, I created this thread... hopefully you guys can discuss this topic without the need for us to lock it!

 

[Salamander]

one question or two, if i may be allowed

what does the term "self-taught" actualy represent?

does reading science books count as self teaching?

 

[Urwumpe]

one question or two, if i may be allowed

what does the term "self-taught" actualy represent?

does reading science books count as self teaching?

Yes. You can use the same materials actually easily, that students at an university have (since you can download it), the difference is the assistance (tutors and lectures) and the control of your progress in learning (exams, assignments).

Short: You can easily learn at home, but you can also easily learn wrong. Only communication and learning together to check your understanding of something (which science is) prevents this.

 

[vonneuman]

The only way to achieve anti-gravity is to use a particle called "negative mater". It repels normal mater. So if you wanted to use it to achieve anti-gravity you would need some the same size as the earth in order to cancel out earth's gravity.

 

[Urwumpe]

The only way to achieve anti-gravity is to use a particle called "negative mater".

Yes. A hypothetical particle that doesn't exist in any particle physic model we have. which is just unobtainium for filling gaps in anti-gravity publications. Don't fall prey to such cheats. Only because you can imagine it and write about it, it doesn't mean it exists.

 

[tori]

Heim does anti-gravity without negative (or zero) mass.

 

[Urwumpe]

Heim does anti-gravity without negative (or zero) mass.

He doesn't. HQT does gravity modification.

 

[Loru]

Yes. A hypothetical particle that doesn't exist in any particle physic model we have. which is just unobtainium for filling gaps in anti-gravity publications. Don't fall prey to such cheats. Only because you can imagine it and write about it, it doesn't mean it exists.

Ok - what about current acceleration of universe expansion.

Does this proces is driven by strange attribute of spacetime or maybe by some "mysterious anti-gravitons". We are still doing first steps to understand physics so I think in time (maybe 100 or maybe 1000 years) we will develop such device.

 

[Salamander]

i can think of another theoretical way to achieve antigravitation.
if gravity waves could be refracted or reflected like lightwaves, directional imbalances could be created. carefully adjusted an object could be balanced between them.

 

[JamesG]

That presumes that there are "gravity waves" that are analogous to electromagnetic waves. Which is unlikely.

To fall back to a 2D model, gravitational fluctuations are more likely to be like ripples or "dents" in space time. Its unlikely that you can get directionality out of it without some wierd behavior or stresss like extremely strong grav gradient side lobes etc. if at all. Push a wave of water "directionally" in one direction and look at what happens behind it...

 

[markl316]

Food for thought:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exotic_matter

 

[Eagle]

That presumes that there are "gravity waves" that are analogous to electromagnetic waves. Which is unlikely.

No it doesn't. Sound waves refract (longitudinal), ocean waves refract (transverse). They both diffract as well.

Of course its slightly more difficult to diffract a gravitational wave. Observationally we'd want to observe a gravitational waves that took at least two paths from the same source; scientists would love to test this, but they're already busy trying to better detect a single gravitational wave.

 

[JamesG]

There is a big differences between electromagnetic "waves", sound pressure waves, and the convient use of 2D surface wave forms to describe space time.

You are speaking of the hypothetical. We have yet to prove anything about gravity other than it is the attractive force between matter with mass.

 

[Urwumpe]

Does this proces is driven by strange attribute of spacetime or maybe by some "mysterious anti-gravitons".

Actually spacetime. And is fueled by energy density in the universe. This part of the phenomena is already explained well by Einsteins general theory of relativity. And there is no acceleration measured yet. The only study that claimed this had a bad ending when people found out that the claimed acceleration was below the measurement accuracy.

We are still doing first steps to understand physics so I think in time (maybe 100 or maybe 1000 years) we will develop such device.

I still don't think so, out of a very naturalistic view: There is no known phenomena in the universe that behaves like that. Until we have not seen it, we can't discover it. And even if there would be a discovery of anti-gravity at the particle level, this does not automatically apply to propulsion systems.

 

[blane]

Maybe we should figure out what gravity actually is, first.

Ah SCNR, I didn't post in such a long time.