Anti-gravity as described by Al Bielek

[OpenMind]

Dear all,

 

I 'm someone with an open mind interested in urban myths etc.

 

I found a supposed interview by someone called Al Bielek who claims to have travelled through time. He would have done that in a US military experiment, now it's naive to dismiss all extraordinary claims as there will definitely exist secret technology by the military, though this is quite extraordinary to claim.

 

I seriously listened to what he said (though most likely fake it's still a fascinating story he had to tell and betterctyan most science-fiction) He said that he travelled to the 22nd and 28th century. He described floating cities in the 28th century.

 

The relevant part of the interview here in which he describes how it physically worked according to him can be found from 0:48 to 2:28 and he talks about it in some other part too.

 

 

 

Now I want to ask people with knowledge of physics if what he says is complete mumbo-jumbo or if (by coincidence or some physical knowledge which he has) something of what he says is correct.

 

He also explained how anti-gravity was established by removing the pressure above something, is this correct I ask s a layman and can something lose gravity by removing pressure from above? It seems logical to me.

[koti]

I've listened to the first 3 minutes only. He states that every 300 stories they install an anti gravity platform to remove pressure from the weight of a very tall building thus making it possible to build very tall buildings. It is extraordinary that he travelled to the 28th century and has zero knowledge about how things work there. This is as high as it gets on my BS scale. My suggestion, type in Richard Feynman into youtube and listen to him talk instead of feeding youreself this crap.

Edited October 14, 2016 by koti

[swansont]

The relevant part of the interview here in which he describes how it physically worked according to him can be found from 0:48 to 2:28 and he talks about it in some other part too.

 

 

!

Moderator Note

Can you summarize his arguments, so that people who can't (or don't want to) watch the video can weigh in?

[Mordred]

He certainly isn't aware that increasing pressure increases gravity. Lol can you imagine the affect on weather systems...

Edited October 14, 2016 by Mordred

[Sriman Dutta]

Removal of pressure means antigravity!

Do you understand that gravity is present only because of atmospheric pressure?

[koti]

Removal of pressure means antigravity!

Do you understand that gravity is present only because of atmospheric pressure?

It's the other way around. Atmospheric pressure is present because of gravity (and also density of the gasses in air)

Removal of gravity would mean lack of atmospheric pressure (on earth)

Removal of atmospheric pressure would not give you anti gravity (whatever anti gravity might mean) You can create a vacum (lack of atmospheric pressure) on earth and it does not affect gravity.

There is no atmospheric pressure on the moon and undoubtedly there is gravity on the moon.

Edited October 15, 2016 by koti

[OpenMind]

Hi, thanks for your replies. As I 'm critical about things, but have a lack of physical knowledge due to poor education I asked it here.

 

Could someone explain me the difference between normal pressure and atmospheric pressure? So on a planet with no atmosphere there is zero gravity?

[Strange]

Could someone explain me the difference between normal pressure and atmospheric pressure? So on a planet with no atmosphere there is zero gravity?

 

On a planet with zero gravity (such a thing is not possible, so lets say a body with 1/6th Earth's gravity: the Moon) there will be almost no atmosphere.

 

On the other hand, there could well be a planet with a gravity similar to Earth but with almost no atmosphere.

[koti]

Hi, thanks for your replies. As I 'm critical about things, but have a lack of physical knowledge due to poor education I asked it here.

 

Could someone explain me the difference between normal pressure and atmospheric pressure? So on a planet with no atmosphere there is zero gravity?

 

OpenMind...great that you are aking questions and welcome to the forum. I've been here only a month and a half and I've already learned a lot.

 

Atmospheric (air) pressure on earth is 1 Bar at sea level. If you take a dive 2m into water you will feel the pressure of about 2 Bar due to the 2m of water above you pushing onto you. Atmospheric pressure is just the density of the air that you are breathing and it's present exactly becasue of the same principle as the water analogy I gave you...a column of air above you is creating this pressure. If you climb a high mountain the air pressure will be much lower there...you can feel that it's harder to breathe because you have to inhale more air into your lungs to get the same amount of oxygen into your lungs as you would being at sea level. The air at higher altitudes is thinner, less dense - it has a lower atmospheric pressure.

Our moon has no atmosphere and has gravity, that should give you a hint.

 

Gravity is a little more complex but in lay mens terms - if you increase the mass, the more gravity you will get - moon has a lower mass than the earth so it has much less gravity. If you putt pressure on mass and crunch it into a smaller space you also get more gravity (this is how black holes are born) When there is any mass there has to be gravity. When there is lots of mass there is lot's of gravity. No mass = no gravity.

Edited October 17, 2016 by koti

[OpenMind]

OpenMind...great that you are aking questions and welcome to the forum. I've been here only a month and a half and I've already learned a lot.

Atmospheric (air) pressure on earth is 1 Bar at sea level. If you take a dive 2m into water you will feel the pressure of about 2 Bar due to the 2m of water above you pushing onto you. Atmospheric pressure is just the density of the air that you are breathing and it's present exactly becasue of the same principle as the water analogy I gave you...a column of air above you is creating this pressure. If you climb a high mountain the air pressure will be much lower there...you can feel that it's harder to breathe because you have to inhale more air into your lungs to get the same amount of oxygen into your lungs as you would being at sea level. The air at higher altitudes is thinner, less dense - it has a lower atmospheric pressure.

Our moon has no atmosphere and has gravity, that should give you a hint.

So as I understand anti-gravity has nothing to do with pressure? Can anti-gravity only be achieved by negative energy? I regularly watch science tv-shows and by negative energy you can levitate things as far as I understood?

 

Al Bielek was already suspicious to me, because he sells CDs etc with his story and his story changed over the years, which wouldn't happen when a story is true.

 

As my username says I am Open Minded, therefore I don't immediately dismiss claims like time travel, I mean, according to Karl Popper scientific paradigms can be overthrown, so who knows, maybe in the future we can time travel with new scientific paradigms, but if someone is obviously a fraud, asks a lot of money, changes his/her story they aren't credible to me anymore.

[koti]

So as I understand anti-gravity has nothing to do with pressure? Can anti-gravity only be achieved by negative energy? I regularly watch science tv-shows and by negative energy you can levitate things as far as I understood?

Anti gravity is science fiction.

 

Al Bielek was already suspicious to me, because he sells CDs etc with his story and his story changed over the years, which wouldn't happen when a story is true.

As my username says I am Open Minded, therefore I don't immediately dismiss claims like time travel, I mean, according to Karl Popper scientific paradigms can be overthrown, so who knows, maybe in the future we can time travel with new scientific paradigms, but if someone is obviously a fraud, asks a lot of money, changes his/her story they aren't credible to me anymore.

Time travel is a far off idea but theoreticaly possible.

[OpenMind]

 

So as I understand anti-gravity has nothing to do with pressure? Can anti-gravity only be achieved by negative energy? I regularly watch science tv-shows and by negative energy you can levitate things as far as I understood?

Anti gravity is science fiction.

Al Bielek was already suspicious to me, because he sells CDs etc with his story and his story changed over the years, which wouldn't happen when a story is true.

 

As my username says I am Open Minded, therefore I don't immediately dismiss claims like time travel, I mean, according to Karl Popper scientific paradigms can be overthrown, so who knows, maybe in the future we can time travel with new scientific paradigms, but if someone is obviously a fraud, asks a lot of money, changes his/her story they aren't credible to me anymore.Time travel is a far off idea but theoreticaly possible.

 

If anti-gravity is science-fiction what does negative energy do? I thought it does the opposite of normal energy and can 'push away' energy so that it moves a spaceship for instance while the spaceship itself doesn't move at all? It would also turn gravity to anti-gravity.

[koti]

If anti-gravity is science-fiction what does negative energy do? I thought it does the opposite of normal energy and can 'push away' energy so that it moves a spaceship for instance while the spaceship itself doesn't move at all? It would also turn gravity to anti-gravity.

 

Negative energy is an idea used in quantum mechanics specificaly quantum field theory to explain how fields behave.

Science fiction writers picked up the concept of negative energy and are using it for science fiction purposes like anti gravity.

Heres a video that will help you to get a firmer grip on gravity:

 

 

 

Edited October 17, 2016 by koti

[OpenMind]

Negative energy is an idea used in quantum mechanics specificaly quantum field theory to explain how fields behave.

Science fiction writers picked up the concept of negative energy and are using it for science fiction purposes like anti gravity.

Heres a video that will help you to get a firmer grip on gravity:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlTVIMOix3I

 

Interesting video, but the problem is that I didn't learn about this idea from Science-fiction, but scientists. They however added that an immense amount of negativd energy would be needed to move the space around objects, about the size of Jupiter, which makes it practically impossible with our current technology.

[Strange]

If anti-gravity is science-fiction what does negative energy do?

 

Negative energy is a purely hypothetical concept. There is no evidence that such a thing can exist.

[koti]

Interesting video, but the problem is that I didn't learn about this idea from Science-fiction, but scientists. They however added that an immense amount of negativd energy would be needed to move the space around objects, about the size of Jupiter, which makes it practically impossible with our current technology.

 

I am familar with some far off ideas concerning negative energy like wormhole creation or fasther than light travel by manipulating spacetime curvature in front and back of a theoretical spaceship (all these are more or less scifi too) but I've never heard of negative energy being used with the concept of anti-gravity in a serious scientific discussion by physisists. I may be wrong though, maybe some of the more knowlegable members (physisists) can help you out on this one.

If you watched the video, you now know that gravity is actualy spacetime curvature - the more mass, the more curved space-time is.

As for anti-gravity I'd use this analogy... We have heat but can we have "anti-heat" ? We have cold but we cannot refer to cold (lack of heat) as "anti-heat" - theres no such thing as "anti-heat" There is just heat or there is less heat and thats it.

 

Edited October 17, 2016 by koti

[OpenMind]

Negative energy is a purely hypothetical concept. There is no evidence that such a thing can exist.

I thought that they proved its existence in a laboratory?

[koti]

I thought that they proved its existence in a laboratory?

No. It's a concept.

[Strange]

I thought that they proved its existence in a laboratory?

 

Could you provide a reference? I am not aware of anything like that (but there are a lot of things I am not aware of.)

[Tim88]

In principle the problem is not so much that he claims that he traveled to the 28th century, as that can in theory be achieved by slowing down his biological clock. The problem is that he claims to have traveled back in time to our age; it's according to current knowledge impossible, even nonsensical, that he returned from the future.

[..]
I seriously listened to what he said (though most likely fake it's still a fascinating story he had to tell and betterctyan most science-fiction) He said that he travelled to the 22nd and 28th century. He described floating cities in the 28th century.
[..]

[OpenMind]

In principle the problem is not so much that he claims that he traveled to the 28th century, as that can in theory be achieved by slowing down his biological clock. The problem is that he claims to have traveled back in time to our age; it's according to current knowledge impossible, even nonsensical, that he returned from the future.

But if you build a time machine, you can travel back to the point where the time machine is created...

[koti]

In principle the problem is not so much that he claims that he traveled to the 28th century, as that can in theory be achieved by slowing down his biological clock. The problem is that he claims to have traveled back in time to our age; it's according to current knowledge impossible, even nonsensical, that he returned from the future.

 

Tim88...don't you mean that due to time dilation effect someone traveling in a spaceship will end up being younger than his twin brother on earth ?

This concept would most definitely not enable you to "travel" to the 28th century in a sense that OpenMind's video suggests.

But if you build a time machine, you can travel back to the point where the time machine is created...

 

I think I saw a movie once where this rule was used. This is not science OpenMind, its SciFi.

 

Edited October 17, 2016 by koti

[Strange]

This concept would most definitely not enable you to "travel" to the 28th century in a sense that OpenMind's video suggests.

 

Well, if you could achieve sufficient time dilation such that 7 centuries passed on Earth in a few years, days or minutes of your time, then that would effectively be time travel into the future. Or the nearest thing that is actually possible with currently known physics.

[koti]

 

Well, if you could achieve sufficient time dilation such that 7 centuries passed on Earth in a few years, days or minutes of your time, then that would effectively be time travel into the future. Or the nearest thing that is actually possible with currently known physics.

 

I agree. I just prefer to call this relativistic effect time dilation and not "time travel"

I think that we have to firmly distinguish between time dilation which is a scientific fact and the moronic mumbo jumbo contained in the video posted by OpenMind.

 

 

[OpenMind]

Tim88...don't you mean that due to time dilation effect someone traveling in a spaceship will end up being younger than his twin brother on earth ?

This concept would most definitely not enable you to "travel" to the 28th century in a sense that OpenMind's video suggests.

 

 

I think I saw a movie once where this rule was used. This is not science OpenMind, its SciFi.

 

This scientist disagrees with you, he says you can only travel back to the time when a time machine was built:

 

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/13/130412-iranian-time-machine-time-travel-grandfather-paradox/

 

(Not the Iranian guy but the one interviewed here)

Well, if you could achieve sufficient time dilation such that 7 centuries passed on Earth in a few years, days or minutes of your time, then that would effectively be time travel into the future. Or the nearest thing that is actually possible with currently known physics.

What is time dilation?