Anti-Gravity Theory

[Knolk]

I know this type of theorisation is probably still quite far up the general science agenda but for a couple of hours now I have been looking for different theories on Anti-gravity technology and to be quite honest with only basic secondary school science under my belt, all of these different theories didn't seem to make sense to me because there seemed to be holes in the different theories (well from what I could tell).

 

So being me I started to work out my own theory; now I know that the earth has a gravitation force, but I was wondering whether it has an electronic field some sort of polaric frequency/energy (the though occurred to me when I made the connection that all planets have different amounts of gravity and that with more mass comes more energy like magnets), if this is correct then this is how I believe atoms gain their weight because the are at a certain polaric frequency different to that of the Earth’s. So carrying on, what if the earths polaric frequency was determined, in theory could a device be invented which changes the polarity of an object causing it to in essence hover against the earths gravity pull when it is put nearer to the polaric frequency of the planet, like a pair of magnets?

 

I know that this may seem very far fetched, hence why I am asking more experienced scientists for their opinions.

[Psion]

In my idea, anything that is antigravity will crush all metal underneath it by using magnetic forces. Objects will oppose each other thus giving a pressure allowing one to lift above the other.

 

A primitive technology used, yes. Efficient however.

 

I rather in my opinion have a low-carb burrito. Man, i could really go for a burrito right now.

 

Ever since I was a child, i thought that this would be the way to do it.

[YT2095]

In my idea' date=' anything that is antigravity will crush all metal underneath it by using magnetic forces. Objects will oppose each other thus giving a pressure allowing one to lift above the other.

 

A primitive technology used, yes. Efficient however.

[/quote']

 

what evidence do you have to support this? why Metal, why not plastic bottles with pink elephants on it, sold at a discount store?

[YT2095]

well... After your edit, you`ve just compounded your own Flaw.

not ALL metals are magnetic, and secondly magnetic repulsion is NOT anti-gravity!

[MulderMan]

and secondly magnetic repulsion is NOT anti-gravity!

 

i was suprised the ammount of people think magnetic levitation is antigravity!

 

q: what theory of gravity/antigravity were you looking at?

[darkkazier]

Well, you Dark energy might fit the bill, scientists think its what's causing the acceleration of the universe, so that might be what you're lookign for. Or some type of negative energy source, then you can do all kinds of things.

[danny8522003]

If we found that Gravitons existed, could their anti-particles impose anti-gravity?

 

In addition, if we could create negative mass from negative energy (Casimir Effect) could this be used to produce anti-gravity?

[Janus]

If we found that Gravitons existed' date=' could their anti-particles impose anti-gravity?

 

[/quote'] Nope, because just like photons, gravitons would be their own antiparticle.

[YT2095]

i was suprised the ammount of people think magnetic levitation is antigravity!

 

q: what theory of gravity/antigravity were you looking at?

 

I`m not sure if that question was for me, but on the off chance it was...

I don`t think there IS a credible "Theory" about anti-gravity, and to me anti-gravity would imply something unaffected by gravity (like neutral boyancy).

 

if magnetic levitation IS considered anti-grav, then I would also use the same criteria to say that a Rocket engine or propeller was Also an anti-grav machine/device.

[slur]

It's quite simple. Space is not "nothing," and one of its amazing properties is that it generates space. Thus the galaxies aren't moving apart at an increasing rate. Rather, space is expanding everywhere at all times, (like a raisin cake in which the flour makes more flour).

 

Along with this, I am convinced that space is not an inert continuum, but a shared property of all energy. Looked at this way, matter and energy is not in space. Rather, that which we call "space" is simply one aspect of the totality of all energy in the universe, which is a unified phenomenon.

 

Mind-blowing, isn't it?