Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2  [ show all ]
Invisiblewhiterasta
Day careobserver
 User Gallery
Registered: 04/09/02
Posts: 1,780
Loc: Oregon
Re: do you think that anti-gravity propulsion is possible? [Re: HagbardCeline]
    #1644459 - 06/19/03 10:57 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

Gravity is a "tax" the universe pays for space-time.Probably not a particle but a condition which "allows" space-time/matter to unfold in a controlled fashion instead of a lightspeed expansion.You may draw your own conclusions as to why this would be a more likely expression of space-time.
As for "black holes" IMO they feed the implicit dimension from which all that is manifest arises from.They digest the organization of the material and "pump" it back into the realm of possibility creating a "pressure" to manifest which causes all to be.The laws of material manifestation which we are just beginning to "scientificaly" understand dictate the form and organization of whatever is finally determined to be the primal material manifstation,be it Quarks or some other even more exotic quasi -particle.It is by these "laws" that the cyclic refresh rate of the universe is perpetuated and powered It can possibly be said the universe is as close to a perpetual motion device as has been seen.Gravity is the tax which powers the system.The real question is the system zero-sum,static and perpetual? Is it a positive-sum, losing energy? Or is it a negative -sum, drawing energy from the force which gives it organization.
At any rate to the original post ,yes any thing is possible when understanding is complete.
That should keep the S/P flavor in this post eh?
:wink: :rasta: WR


--------------------
To old for this place

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinejohnnyfive
Burning withCircles!
Registered: 07/02/02
Posts: 886
Loc: Hell
Last seen: 19 years, 10 months
Re: do you think that anti-gravity propulsion is possible? [Re: blaze2]
    #1644588 - 06/19/03 11:34 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

i believe!


--------------------
And the gameshow host rings the buzzer (brrnnntt) oh and now you get a face full of face!

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinelucid
Jack's AlteredConsciousness

Registered: 03/29/03
Posts: 6,319
Loc: up on the bidet
Last seen: 10 years, 5 months
Re: do you think that anti-gravity propulsion is possible? [Re: johnnyfive]
    #1644622 - 06/19/03 11:44 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

>i believe!
smart man...I have a perpetual motion machine u might
be interested in... very simple to construct using
household items... I'll send u the plans if u send
me $100 and a self addressed envelope...
:grin: 


--------------------
"no-mind un-thinks no-thought..."

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: do you think that anti-gravity propulsion is possible? [Re: HagbardCeline]
    #1644651 - 06/19/03 11:53 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

Swami, you are wrong.
That would be a first!

By research that is what I meant, I merely collected information.
If I read Von Daniken, am I doing "research"?

Why you are attacking me for saying that is beyond me.
"You" were not attacked; your idea of what constitutes research was put to question.

Just because they haven't been proven in no way makes them fictional.
No, it gives them even more validity.

Now some of them certainly are, but I think others truly believe they have achieved it.
Belief does not make it so.

One of the videos I lost was a guy that had constructed a box with one open end and when he placed objects inside of it, they would suddenly shoot to the top. It was a very convincing video, but of course something happened to his equipment and he has been unable to reproduce his results.
Naturally! (Ah, the old "spring-in-the-box" trick.)

But if gravity exists,
It does - you can test this by jumping off your roof.

...there is no reason I see that would prevent a technology from reproducing the same effect in reverse.
Your inability to see a reason, means nothing in the world of physics.


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: do you think that anti-gravity propulsion is possible? [Re: Sev]
    #1644656 - 06/19/03 11:55 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

Calling that antigrav is like me lifting up a pen and going, "Look! Antigravity!"

That is WAY cool, bro! Can you do the trick with the pen again?


--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineHagbardCeline
Student-Teacher-Student-Teacher
Male User Gallery

Registered: 05/10/03
Posts: 10,028
Loc: Overjoyed, at the bottom ...
Last seen: 1 month, 10 days
Re: do you think that anti-gravity propulsion is possible? [Re: Swami]
    #1645217 - 06/19/03 02:55 PM (20 years, 9 months ago)

"You" were not attacked; your idea of what constitutes research was put to question.
My idea was the dictionary's defintion.  If you want to question that, talk to Merriam-Webster.

"You" were not attacked; your idea of what constitutes research was put to question.
Yeah, I am sure you thought that the Star Trek bit would only help validate your point and was in no way demeaning.

No, it gives them even more validity.
Is it your ascertion that every hypothesis and  theory in science is fiction until proven true?

Belief does not make it so.
True.  I never said they were, but it doesn't  necessarily make them fictional stories either.

Naturally! (Ah, the old "spring-in-the-box" trick.)
Here,  http://www.americanantigravity.com/hutchison.html  , I found it.  I didn't read everything, but I may have been mistaken about him not being able to reproduce his results.  Does that look like a spring-in-a-box to you?

It does - you can test this by jumping off your roof.
Thanks for clearing that up for me, I wondered why I kept falling.  Can you help me with peeing?  I seem to have forgotten how. :confused:

Your inability to see a reason, means nothing in the world of physics.
Sure it does.  It means if there isn't anyting preventing it, it is a possibility.  Or does your skepticism prevent you from acknowledging that?

Calling that antigrav is like me lifting up a pen and going, "Look! Antigravity!"

Actually it is nothing like that.  Here  is a paper from the Army Research Laboratory and Purdue University on lifters.  They did experiments in a vaccum chamber and they still worked, blowing out the ionic wind theory.  I think this may be better described by the term electrogravity instead of anti-gravity.

Swami, I am sure that you must think that the Army and well respected universities and companies like General Electric and Boeing generate nothing but fiction.

Everything should be approached with skepticism, but when it blinds you to the possibities, I think you have become just like the people you are trying to debunk.  Instead of completely accepting everything, you completely deny it.


 


--------------------
I keep it real because I think it is important that a highly esteemed individual such as myself keep it real lest they experience the dreaded spontaneous non-existance of no longer keeping it real. - Hagbard Celine

Edited by HagbardCeline (06/19/03 04:52 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSwami
Eggshell Walker

Registered: 01/18/00
Posts: 15,413
Loc: In the hen house
Re: do you think that anti-gravity propulsion is possible? [Re: HagbardCeline]
    #1645296 - 06/19/03 03:22 PM (20 years, 9 months ago)

"You" were not attacked; your idea of what constitutes research was put to question.
My idea was the dictionary's defintion. If you want to question that, talk to Merriam-Webster.

The fact remains that YOU were not attacked.

re?search ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-s?rch, rs?rch)
n.
Scholarly or scientific investigation or inquiry.

Reading a questionable website is NOT scholary inquiry, it is entertainment.

Yeah, I am sure you thought that the Star Trek bit would only help validate your point and was in no way demeaning.
How is viewing a fictional information on a TV different than viewing fictional information ona computer screen?

Is it your ascertion that every hypothesis and theory in science is fiction until proven true?
No, but your "you can't prove a negative" bit has been covered in this forum endlessly as to it's fallaciousness.

Naturally! (Ah, the old "spring-in-the-box" trick.)
Here, http://www.americanantigravity.com/hutchison.html , I found it. I didn't read everything, but I may have been mistaken about him not being able to reproduce his results. Does that look like a spring-in-a-box to you?

You had no link before.

Swami, I am sure that you must think that the Army and well respected universities and companies like General Electric and Boeing generate nothing but fiction.
Your certainty is misplaced. they have generated many inventions, but no anti-grav, teleportation or warp drive.

Everything should be approached with skepticism
Yeah, a convert!

Instead of completely accepting everything, you completely deny it.
I accept solar power, nuclear fusion, internal combustion engines, light bulbs, computers, microwaves, radio; etc. plus a million other things. How is that in any way "complete denial"?






--------------------



The proof is in the pudding.

Edited by Swami (06/19/03 04:06 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinelucid
Jack's AlteredConsciousness

Registered: 03/29/03
Posts: 6,319
Loc: up on the bidet
Last seen: 10 years, 5 months
Re: do you think that anti-gravity propulsion is possible? [Re: Swami]
    #1645328 - 06/19/03 03:32 PM (20 years, 9 months ago)

>I accept solar power, nuclear fusion, internal combustion engines,
>light bulbs, computers, microwaves, radio; etc. plus a million other
>things
how about Leprechauns ? just curious...


--------------------
"no-mind un-thinks no-thought..."

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineHagbardCeline
Student-Teacher-Student-Teacher
Male User Gallery

Registered: 05/10/03
Posts: 10,028
Loc: Overjoyed, at the bottom ...
Last seen: 1 month, 10 days
Re: do you think that anti-gravity propulsion is possible? [Re: Swami]
    #1645721 - 06/19/03 05:39 PM (20 years, 9 months ago)

The fact remains that YOU were not attacked.
It may have not been your intention, but by relegating what I had said to science fiction, it seemed personal.  Maybe I am being to sensitive. :tongue:

Reading a questionable website is NOT scholary inquiry, it is entertainment.
Once again, here is Merriam-Webster's defintion of research.
Main Entry: [1]re?search
Pronunciation: ri-'s&rch, 'rE-"
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French recerche, from recerchier to investigate thoroughly, from Old French, from re- + cerchier to search ?more at SEARCH
Date: 1577
1 : careful or diligent search
2 : studious inquiry or examination; especially : investigation or experimentation aimed at the discovery and interpretation of facts, revision of accepted theories or laws in the light of new facts, or practical application of such new or revised theories or laws
3 : the collecting of information about a particular subject

There it is.  Number 3.  It doesn't say anything about the state of that information to qualify as research.  Just because it doesn't fit all of the defintions meanings (ie. Scholarly, which isn't even in this dictionary's definitons), doesn't make it any less correct.  Your grasping.

How is viewing a fictional information on a TV different than viewing fictional information ona computer screen?
Because it isn't fictional.  Did you look at any of links I posted.  There are hundreds if not thousands of people doing experiments and research.  Universities, Military, independant inventors, well known corporations, and even NASA are all researching it (Number 2, in the above definition) How can you call that fictional?

No, but your "you can't prove a negative" bit has been covered in this forum endlessly as to it's fallaciousness.
My bit was to prove that these things should remain in the realm of possibility until proven otherwise.

You had no link before.
Actually I did, and from the same website.  I think you just didn't bother to research it. :grin:

Your certainty is misplaced. they have generated many inventions, but no anti-grav, teleportation or warp drive.
I was being facetious.  But because they have not yet been produced by those entities, does not make them impossible.

Yeah, a convert!
Hehe, actually I was skeptic long before this.  I will however,  give you credit for refining my idea of what it means to be skeptical.

I accept solar power, nuclear fusion, internal combustion engines, light bulbs, computers, microwaves, radio; etc. plus a million other things. How is that in any way "complete denial"?
I guess I didn't communicate my idea effectively.  I meant that it seems you deny the possibility of everything that is open to debate.  Or at least that is all I have seen.

You never answered the question this thread has posed.  Do you think that anti-gravity is possible?   


--------------------
I keep it real because I think it is important that a highly esteemed individual such as myself keep it real lest they experience the dreaded spontaneous non-existance of no longer keeping it real. - Hagbard Celine

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinelucid
Jack's AlteredConsciousness

Registered: 03/29/03
Posts: 6,319
Loc: up on the bidet
Last seen: 10 years, 5 months
Re: do you think that anti-gravity propulsion is possible? [Re: HagbardCeline]
    #1645782 - 06/19/03 06:03 PM (20 years, 9 months ago)

>You never answered the question this thread has posed. Do you think
>that anti-gravity is possible?
yeah, and about those leprechauns...


--------------------
"no-mind un-thinks no-thought..."

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRhizoid
carbon unit
Male

Registered: 01/22/00
Posts: 1,739
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 1 month, 17 days
Re: do you think that anti-gravity propulsion is possible? [Re: HagbardCeline]
    #1646977 - 06/20/03 01:14 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

Here is a paper from the Army Research Laboratory and Purdue University on lifters. They did experiments in a vaccum chamber and they still worked, blowing out the ionic wind theory.




Sorry, but that's not what the paper says. They present two theoretical mechanisms for the lifters: ballistic ionic wind and non-ballistic ionic drift. The ballistic effect was too small to explain the experiments in air, but the ionic drift effect was right on the spot.

They also say that the ballistic effect would be present in a vacuum, but it is much smaller than the drift effect in air. No one has been able to reproduce any larger vacuum effect, and there is no reproducible evidence that there is any effect on gravity.

Edited by Rhizoid (06/20/03 01:16 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSclorch
Clyster

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/12/99
Posts: 4,805
Loc: On the Brink of Madness
Re: do you think that anti-gravity propulsion is possible? [Re: HagbardCeline]
    #1647008 - 06/20/03 01:25 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

There it is. Number 3. It doesn't say anything about the state of that information to qualify as research. Just because it doesn't fit all of the defintions meanings (ie. Scholarly, which isn't even in this dictionary's definitons), doesn't make it any less correct. Your grasping.

Thank God....
Now I know that when my mother watches American Idol that she isn't merely being entertained... she's actually performing valid research about um... hold on... it'll come to me... hmmm.....


--------------------
Note: In desperate need of a cure...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleSkorpivoMusterion
Livin in theTwilight Zone...
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/30/03
Posts: 9,954
Loc: You can't spell fungus wi...
Re: do you think that anti-gravity propulsion is possible? [Re: Sclorch]
    #1647109 - 06/20/03 02:23 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

do you think that anti-gravity propulsion is possible?



POSSIBLE? YES....look at UFOs...
its simply a matter of being able to reverse an object's personal gravitational polarity and being able to CONTROL it....
so its really a question of whether or not we will be able to develop the technology to do so...and I believe the answer is "Yes....EVENTUALLY"


--------------------
Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineblaze2
The Witness
Male

Registered: 12/20/02
Posts: 1,883
Loc: San Antonio, TX
Last seen: 11 years, 8 months
Re: do you think that anti-gravity propulsion is possible? [Re: SkorpivoMusterion]
    #1648964 - 06/20/03 04:32 PM (20 years, 9 months ago)

yea swami i respect your skeptism it is needed in any argument but your taking this one too far. you can research anything. i mean look at some method actors if they play a druggy then for research they do drugs. but its still research. also the hutchinson thing is a very big deal he hasnt been able to reproduce it unfortunately but the army was very interested and pursued this for quite a while. i know for a fact that boeing is working on an anti-grav device of some sort. i was wathcing some show on discovery wings channel and the director of boeing was being interviewed and he said that they were close but wouldnt elaborate on it of course since its a big secret project.


--------------------
"Religion without science is blind, Science without religion is lame." Albert Einstein

"peace is not maintained through force it is acheived through intelligence." Albert Einstein

"Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one."
Thomas Jefferson

"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineHagbardCeline
Student-Teacher-Student-Teacher
Male User Gallery

Registered: 05/10/03
Posts: 10,028
Loc: Overjoyed, at the bottom ...
Last seen: 1 month, 10 days
Re: do you think that anti-gravity propulsion is possible? [Re: Rhizoid]
    #1649229 - 06/20/03 06:10 PM (20 years, 9 months ago)

Rhizoid, did you read the whole paper?

Sorry, but that's not what the paper says. They present two theoretical mechanisms for the lifters: ballistic ionic wind and non-ballistic ionic drift. The ballistic effect was too small to explain the experiments in air, but the ionic drift effect was right on the spot.

It has long been the contention of the naysayers that this effect was purely caused from ionic wind. Although the drift effect does account for the effect in air, it would not account for the amount of force observed in the vaccum.

Even if it did, does this not excite you as a possibility of new form of propulsion?

I don't think it is anti-gravity, like I said earlier these would be considered more electrogravity. I find it difficult to believe that you would deny the connection between electromagnetism and gravity.

Also the equations used for figuring the ionic drift, relied on many variables that will require further experimentation to conclusivley figure out.


--------------------
I keep it real because I think it is important that a highly esteemed individual such as myself keep it real lest they experience the dreaded spontaneous non-existance of no longer keeping it real. - Hagbard Celine

Edited by HagbardCeline (06/21/03 10:34 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineHagbardCeline
Student-Teacher-Student-Teacher
Male User Gallery

Registered: 05/10/03
Posts: 10,028
Loc: Overjoyed, at the bottom ...
Last seen: 1 month, 10 days
Re: do you think that anti-gravity propulsion is possible? [Re: HagbardCeline]
    #1649248 - 06/20/03 06:15 PM (20 years, 9 months ago)

Oh and Swami, does reading this paper count as research? :confused: 


--------------------
I keep it real because I think it is important that a highly esteemed individual such as myself keep it real lest they experience the dreaded spontaneous non-existance of no longer keeping it real. - Hagbard Celine

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRhizoid
carbon unit
Male

Registered: 01/22/00
Posts: 1,739
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 1 month, 17 days
Re: do you think that anti-gravity propulsion is possible? [Re: HagbardCeline]
    #1650237 - 06/21/03 02:15 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

I read the whole paper except for the old photocopied patents and the parts where they discuss the thermodynamics of the lifter. There seems to be some confusion here, because in this paper they use the term "ionic wind" only for the ballistic type of ionic motion, while in other places people use the same term for all kinds of ionic motion, including non-ballistic motion like drift.

This quote from the paper makes it clear:

Quote:

Ionic wind is a ballistic flow of charges from one electrode to the other. Clearly the force due to ionic wind is at least three orders of magnitude too small to account for the observed force on an asymmetric capacitor (in air). There is another type of classical transport: drift of charge carriers in an electric field. In the case of drift, the carriers do not have ballistic trajectories, instead they experience collisions on their paths between electrodes. However, due to the presence of an electric field, the carriers have a net motion toward the opposite electrode. This type of transport picture is more accurate (than ballistic ionic wind) for a capacitor whose gap contains air.




And then they present calculations for ionic drift with different types of charge carriers, and conclude:

Quote:

From the scaling derivations that were presented, it is clear that electron drift current leads to a force on the capacitor that is too small. Using the value of mobility appropriate for (nitrogen) ions leads to a force whose order of magnitude is in agreement with experiment.




They say that more research is needed in order to discover the exact mechanism that is responsible for the effect. By this they don't mean that the effect is an enigma that can't be explained by our current theory of gravitation, they just mean that we don't yet know exactly how the air molecules are ionized and distributed in the space between the electrodes.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineRhizoid
carbon unit
Male

Registered: 01/22/00
Posts: 1,739
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 1 month, 17 days
Re: do you think that anti-gravity propulsion is possible? [Re: Rhizoid]
    #1650259 - 06/21/03 02:29 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

I forgot to point out that the people who wrote that army paper didn't actually build a device, it was pure theoretical work. But here is a paper written by Daniel Peng and Willy Wong, who built a lifter themselves and did both measurements and calculations:

"I believe that I can fly!"

Their main conclusion is:

Quote:

The data is consistent with the hypothesis that the lifter is a reaction drive. Toilet paper and other light masses around the lifter were observably blown away from the lifter, and air was moving on the order of 1 ms. An even blue corona was observed around the thin wire of the functional lifter, and the functionality appeared critically dependent on the geometry of the wire and foil in its effect on the corona, though we made no systematic tests to that effect.




They also provide a likely explanation why Townsend Brown thought (mistakingly) that he had discovered an electrogravity effect.

Until someone reproduces a lifter effect in vaccum which is larger than the ballistic ionic wind effect, there is no reason to assume that electromagnetic fields interact with gravity in any other way than everything else does, which is by an attraction proportional to its energy content. Maybe some day we'll produce gravitational waves through some clever particle reaction and use that to manipulate gravity, but no one has a clue yet how to do such a thing.

All this doesn't make the lifter technology uninteresting of course. It would be great to have a flying machine that doesn't have any moving parts! But while everyone talks about scaling them up, I'd like to see a flying nanorobot with a built-in lifter. :smile:
     

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2  [ show all ]

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Gravity is fault logic, it a messup whit vacuum?
( 1 2 all )
Gomp 2,194 29 12/12/04 05:03 PM
by oceansize
* GRAVITY
( 1 2 3 4 all )
BlueOrb 3,426 79 11/10/04 08:23 AM
by trendal
* Intelligent Falling replaces Gravity
( 1 2 all )
OrgoneConclusion 3,230 20 10/06/07 03:42 PM
by KevsaNewb
* Matter and AntiMatter Sole_Worthy 1,081 6 09/19/03 06:16 PM
by Murex
* Gravity is some cool shit!
( 1 2 all )
Scarfmeister 2,000 22 04/02/05 09:33 AM
by Lallafa
* Gravity… Gomp 679 2 05/22/06 10:14 AM
by BlueCoyote
* Anti-christ (also women and power). MJF 745 15 09/22/05 10:24 PM
by crunchytoast
* Gravity is a strange phenomenon. Poptart 495 7 04/19/09 01:37 AM
by DieCommie

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
3,787 topic views. 1 members, 9 guests and 6 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.027 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 14 queries.