Anti-Gravity Discovered

A couple of scientists from the European Space Agency claim to have observed an artificially-generated gravitational field while rotating a superconductive disk:

http://www.esa.int/S...0L6OVGJE_0.html

http://www.scienceda...60325232140.htm


Here is the link to their publication:

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0603033

They're claiming 10^-4g (ie. ~ a ten-thousandth of a g) at approx 6500 rpm

If this phenomenon is real, it could mean the advent of anti-gravity, or even field-based propulsion where no propellant is required.

According to Dr Tajmar, the size of the disk is irrelevant to the effect. By this, I assume he means volume/dimensions/diameter of the disk doesn't affect things, but I'd assume that mass does.

If this gravitomagnetic field scales up with rpm, then I'll assume that the smaller the disk the better, since smaller objects are capable of rotating faster. Nano-scale superconductive gyroscopes might then be able to rotate far faster than macro-sized ones, thus possibly generating more powerful fields.

If you compare the shape of a tube to that of a disk, a tube has a much smaller diameter which thus facilitates a much higher rate of rotation. If the tube is aligned vertically along the axis of gravity, it could be equivalent to a bunch of stacked rings or disks, perhaps linearly scaling up that gravitational field with tube length. I wonder what a superconductive helical shape would do, if it were rotated about the helical axis?

Do these findings also serve as potential supporting evidence for Heim theory, or are the effects too pronounced to be accounted for by the theory?

cosmos, I dunno if this helps to support Heim's theory specifically, since Heim's was just one theory for quantum gravity. But it does appear to support the idea of quantum gravity in general.

Anyway, if this anti-gravity stuff works, then it opens up the possibility of "field propulsion" where you can artificially generate a field to move you around, pushing off space itself, instead of relying upon Newtonian action-reaction where you have to expel propellant.

Your ability to accelerate would then be limited by your power supply, and not by onboard propellant mass.

I've been reading about this for a few years now. I think they've got It about 85% perfected now. Here's some links.

http://news.bbc.co.u...ure/2157975.stm

http://www.enterpris...m/antigrav.html

http://www.enterpris...m/anti-grav.htm

Yeah, I'd read about Podkletnov's claims some years back, too. But others were never able to reproduce his results, so he was dismissed as a crackpot. Here's an interview with Dr Tajmar, who comments on Podkletnov's claims:

http://video.google....045907997981867

(Warning, Dr Tajmar comes across as a reasonable, low-key fellow - but the interviewer sounds like a kook.)

Remember that Podkletnov kept claiming that his results weren't reproducible by others because their superconductive disks weren't made to the exact fine tolerances that his was. That sounds rather suspicious to me.

Tajmar points out that according to his findings, it shouldn't matter what size of disk you use. Also, he says that the effect is not one of mere "gravity shielding", but it's actually generating an artificial gravity field, just like an electromagnetic coil generates a magnetic field.

Oh well, let's hope that other researchers will try to investigate and reproduce the ESA results, in order to prove or disprove the claims. Hey, at least if this thing is disproven, we can all move on to looking at something else.

Yes, the Boeing experiment was an attempt to reproduce Podkletnov's experiment. (another link: http://www.americana...podkletnov.html ). At the time, scientists thought this might be the electromagnetic waves interacting with gravity waves. (who knows!?!?!) At any rate, it had never been reproduced and most scientists dismissed it as an poorly set up experiment.

As far as the Heim-Loretnz force, I’ve heard that the Podkletnov theory has nothing to do with HEIM's theory and the Heim-Loretnz force. The Heim-Loretnz effect apparently grows very slowly with rotating magnet strength until you hit the 20 Tesla limit. Also, if you do a google news search, you won't find any mention of Heim's experiment and the recent ESA experiment.

Personally, I am convinced that this is something huge.

All 3 of the theories involve rotating magnets, and at least one of them (Heim-Loretnz theory) makes a legitimate jab at a unifying theory. Although it is all theory, its equations do a wonderful job predicting the mass of atomic particles.

Also, the fact that the measured field was 100 million trillion times larger than Einstein’s general relativity predicts meaning, maybe this has nothing to do with the gravitomagnetic field. Maybe we are taking a peek at something greater.

Also, they ran the experiment 250 times, improved the facility over 3 years and discussed the validity of the results for 8 months before making this announcement. This is not a poorly set up experiment.

RodentMan Crossing his Fingers

All 3 of the theories involve rotating magnets, and at least one of them (Heim-Loretnz theory) makes a legitimate jab at a unifying theory. Although it is all theory, its equations do a wonderful job predicting the mass of atomic particles.

If you're interested in some relevant idle reading, here's a 35+ page thread on the theory over at PhysOrg.

http://forum.physorg...topic=4385&st=0

Ya I heard somewhere a little while back about this. That's great that they were able to confirm the effect. Now we just need an external facility to confirm it and it could open up a whole new realm.

I haven't been following this too closely, though I know this effect has been claimed for roughly a decade now, IIRC, perhaps longer. It was initially scoffed, and the small number of researchers performing the experiments, combined with their perceived credibility/respectability, has hindered their getting any traction in the mainstream. I personally am still withholding belief, but I stopped scoffing completely a couple years ago. At this point, I'm not as concerned with whether there's a theoretical framework that allows this, so much as I'm concerned with whether these results can be obtained reliably and repeatedly by other labs.

The other kooky theory I used to be interested in was the "Woodward Effect". I haven't heard much on it lately, and I never looked closely enough at the math to see exactly how it worked, but it supposedly didn't rely on any new math, just standard General Relativity tensor calculus--specifically, the third order terms of the solutions, which are almost always ignored because they are typically negligible.

BTW, I don't say "kooky" to imply wrong. Just, er, non-mainstream.

I haven't been following this very closely either, but I had heard somewhere recently that it was theorized that objects travelling close to the speed of light would produce anti-gravitational fields as well? I feel somewhat intimidated interjecting here, though, because as a high school student I've really got no clue what I'm talking about half the time .