Electrogravity, again.

[Xyph]

Is it true?

[swansont]

Several highly respected physicists say it might be possible to construct a force-field machine that acts on all matter in a way that is similar to gravity. Strictly speaking, it wouldn't be an antigravity machine. But by exerting an attractive or repulsive force on all matter, it would be the functional equivalent of the impossible machine.

 

It's called an elevator (lift).

[Teotihuacan]

First of all... Welcome Xyph

 

Interesting article. Wonder what has happened in the six years since? Of course, there was no known note of a string theory posit that gravity may also be the only known force that acts across all dimensions - time included. Hmmm.

 

Further to our discussion on the effecacy of Pseudo science, I found myself wondering today about the rapid dissemination of scientific knowledge, almost as soon as it is "discovered". People can grasp, utilize and re-interpret the concepts quite readily, when only hours before they would've been at a loss to explain any of it. How do such hard won, researched scientific method, replicable apparatus and observation, peer reviewed and theoretically sound results enter the purview of popular science?

 

And, not many hours after thinking that, you give us this wonderful article from Popular Mechanics that shows how psedo science is editorialized.

 

Which, btw, also opens the door for the discussion I wanted to begin in this more relaxed section about our perceptions of this mysterious force they call gravity. You beat me to it.

 

If I may... a point of reference from that article you posted. A paragraph that states what everyone knows:

 

"Everyone knows that gravity is the glue that keeps our feet on the ground and the planets on their orbits. It operates on every single molecule and atom in our bodies. Physicists define gravity as the attractive force between two masses. They also say it is the weakest and most pervasive of the four basic forces of nature. The others are the strong force and weak force that operate within the atomic nucleus and the electromagnetic force that explains everything from refrigerator magnets to light bulbs, telecommunications to chemistry." (1)

 

So... what do we really know about Gravity? Apart from it being a distinct and unique type of force. What kind of properties must it have to behave in the way it does, and still be ...the weakest and most pervasive of the four basic forces of nature.

 

Isn't that beginning with a contradiction, being ...the weakest and most pervasive? Is it the oldest? the fastest? What is this fundamental force that we have known longer, even than ions (ie. fire), struggled against but still know even less?

 

 

ref(1) op.cit.

PopularMechanics

"TAMING GRAVITY"

BY JIM WILSON

Published on: October 1, 1999

[Xyph]

It's called an elevator (lift).

So could this sort of thing be used to provide something like gravity in spacecraft, as opposed to somewhat clumsy looking centrifugal effects?

 

 

 

Thanks for the welcome, Teotihuacan.

[Teotihuacan]

Reading the article again, I can see that it actually is a centrifugal effect, but on a subatomic scale. The theory seems to be that the ions are spinning around a magnetic field, and that the oscilation of their collective mass becomes focused by that field to produce the active, counteractive or modifying effect hoped for.

 

The construction of such a magnetic lattice upon which to affix the axes of these subatomic ions is probably the greatest technical problem, since magnetism exists in a state of flux, and although parallel, tends to curve from pole to pole and like poles repell each other, regardless of their source.

Obviously, the use of super conductors is hoped to shrink the field and contain the aberrant flux in an assimilated grid matrix.

 

The idea itself, may be sound. Although I do question her estimate that 1000 watts could produce the effect to the edge of space (ie. 100 mles). It is barely enough to propell photons that far, let alone massive molecules. However, gravity is a very weak force, which we tend to notice for it's cumulative effects, as in uniform acceleration of an object. Perhaps she's speaking of the actual power needed to negate the effects of gravity and not the total amount of power neccessary to make the mechanism work or actually move the object. Or, even a misprint, if she meant 1000 kw. 750 HP does sound more like it.

 

But yes, assuming that the theory is sound and a prototype can be built, there is a prospect for a more portable & localized gravity simulation, than a large centrifical wheel. Two or more units would be neccessary to produce the effect and to mask it outside the vessel with some sort of dispersion effect.

 

Another way of course, is to design a spacecraft that has uniform acceleration and deceleration during it's journey. Constantly overcoming momentum to produce a gravity like effect, not unlike an elevator starting or stopping.

 

My question is completely different.

 

It could be that prof. Li has stumbled upon what would've been the theory of gravity, if it is a function of mass as Newton calculated. Perhaps it is not? Her effect is clearly not gravity, but could affect it. And hers is based on a kind of mass displacement.

[Teotihuacan]

New light may be shone with the discovery of the largest Pulsar, as posted 08-20-2005, 10:44 AM by Martin, Physics Expert:

A 2.1 Solar Mass Pulsar Measured by Relativistic Orbital Decay

 

The theory behind the integral measurement, as reported by Martin, seems to confirm Prof. Li's hypothesis about proton spin...

 

quot<

They (twin stars) spiral in gradually because they radiate off energy in the form of gravitational waves--

 

and goes on to define "gravitational waves" as----mass moving back and forth, or around, radiates gravity waves

 

(analogously to how charge moving back and forth in an antenna radiates electromagnetic waves). (or indeed, if electricity was used to produce proton spin)

 

This loss of energy, carried away by gravity waves, is what was being measured,

enquot>

 

Since, in a further post from -----quote from Ask Astromer, Kirby link-----

 

"....The cinder is prevented from further gravitational collapse because neutrons are particles with 1/2-unit of quantum spin, and only two of these can exist in the same quantum state. This produces what is called Fermi Degeneracy Pressure which at these densities and neutron star masses, can be as strong as gravity, but a repulsive force."

 

Which, of course, is what prof Li was proposing but on a micronic scale.

 

If so, this brings her back in the running for discovering the mechanizm of gravity that has eluded us so long.