Project Green Glow
Discussion
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-35861334
"So far, we believe that gravity's only a force of attraction. It may be that gravity can also be a force of repulsion but not between matter and matter but between matter and anti-matter."
It's a theory Cern is gearing up to test next year. If Hajdukovic can show that anti-matter particles fall "upwards", he not only opens the way to some form of demonstrable anti-gravity on earth, he almost certainly wins a Nobel prize into the bargain.
"So far, we believe that gravity's only a force of attraction. It may be that gravity can also be a force of repulsion but not between matter and matter but between matter and anti-matter."
It's a theory Cern is gearing up to test next year. If Hajdukovic can show that anti-matter particles fall "upwards", he not only opens the way to some form of demonstrable anti-gravity on earth, he almost certainly wins a Nobel prize into the bargain.
I wish Horizon had said a bit more about the Emdrive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RF_resonant_cavity_t....
The wiki article suggests independent tests using exquisitely sensitive balances have detected tiny but not conclusive forces, yet in Horizon the inventor showed quite heavy test rigs sliding and rotating under their own reactionless thrust.
The wiki article suggests independent tests using exquisitely sensitive balances have detected tiny but not conclusive forces, yet in Horizon the inventor showed quite heavy test rigs sliding and rotating under their own reactionless thrust.
Nimby said:
I wish Horizon had said a bit more about the Emdrive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RF_resonant_cavity_t....
The wiki article suggests independent tests using exquisitely sensitive balances have detected tiny but not conclusive forces, yet in Horizon the inventor showed quite heavy test rigs sliding and rotating under their own reactionless thrust.
I think this need a whole program of it's own.The wiki article suggests independent tests using exquisitely sensitive balances have detected tiny but not conclusive forces, yet in Horizon the inventor showed quite heavy test rigs sliding and rotating under their own reactionless thrust.
That program whilst interesting was a bit of a shambles I thought. They seemed to want to go all woo woo on the various different aspects of research which was a bit saddening. The particle/antiparticle theory of dark energy need a program of it's own as well.
The gravity detection equipment being developed in the UK is absolutely fascinating and could be an total paradigm shift in so many areas of sensor technology, from medical devices to radar - a proper wow moment for me.
Simpo Two said:
Fair enough. Matter makes gravity. Anti-matter makes anti-gravity.
My plan to defeat gravity was a machine to concentrate the Earth's centrifugal force. You turn the knob until it just balances gravity... then a bit more, and up you go
Anti-matter is flippin' dangerous you know!
That sounds like my invention for reversing climate change, it involves pointing lots of electric fires into the air so they balance the solar rays falling on the earth so it will cool down. My plan to defeat gravity was a machine to concentrate the Earth's centrifugal force. You turn the knob until it just balances gravity... then a bit more, and up you go
Anti-matter is flippin' dangerous you know!
Toltec said:
Simpo Two said:
Fair enough. Matter makes gravity. Anti-matter makes anti-gravity.
My plan to defeat gravity was a machine to concentrate the Earth's centrifugal force. You turn the knob until it just balances gravity... then a bit more, and up you go
Anti-matter is flippin' dangerous you know!
That sounds like my invention for reversing climate change, it involves pointing lots of electric fires into the air so they balance the solar rays falling on the earth so it will cool down. My plan to defeat gravity was a machine to concentrate the Earth's centrifugal force. You turn the knob until it just balances gravity... then a bit more, and up you go
Anti-matter is flippin' dangerous you know!
Will you use all that dangerous CO2 that's lying around to cool the emitter arrays?
Seems we'd get double the useful effect if you do that
The EM drive reminds me alittle of Maurice Ward's Starlite- demonstrably amazing yet veiled in mystery and the inventor being subtle about the details.
As with Maurice, I can't see how the inventor profits in the secrecy, "if" it works I'm sure he can get someone willing to invest on an NDA?
Now, where did I leave my cold-fusion reactor that works perfect in 1995 but no one at Uni would take me seriously...
As with Maurice, I can't see how the inventor profits in the secrecy, "if" it works I'm sure he can get someone willing to invest on an NDA?
Now, where did I leave my cold-fusion reactor that works perfect in 1995 but no one at Uni would take me seriously...
Toltec said:
That sounds like my invention for reversing climate change, it involves pointing lots of electric fires into the air so they balance the solar rays falling on the earth so it will cool down.
My plan to stop climate change is to take everyone who says 'climate change' and throw them in the sea. Voila, gone!scubadude said:
The EM drive reminds me alittle of Maurice Ward's Starlite- demonstrably amazing yet veiled in mystery and the inventor being subtle about the details.
As with Maurice, I can't see how the inventor profits in the secrecy, "if" it works I'm sure he can get someone willing to invest on an NDA?
Now, where did I leave my cold-fusion reactor that works perfect in 1995 but no one at Uni would take me seriously...
IIRC The technology is patented and completely in the open, hence why the chap who was trying to replicate the experiment was able to make his own based on the original EM drive model. Unfortunately the program makers decided to make it all seem a bit woo. As with Maurice, I can't see how the inventor profits in the secrecy, "if" it works I'm sure he can get someone willing to invest on an NDA?
Now, where did I leave my cold-fusion reactor that works perfect in 1995 but no one at Uni would take me seriously...
Toaster said:
Simpo Two said:
My plan to stop climate change is to take everyone who says 'climate change' and throw them in the sea. Voila, gone!
Climate change denial won't help you. Programme's reporting of emdrive was a bit schizophrenic. They showed a very careful reproduction of the inventor's kit stuck in a vacuum demonstratively producing no thrust. That rather suggests that, as you'd expect, it doesn't work. The conservation of momentum is a completely fundamental concept. If it is wrong, all physical laws proposed to date are completely undermined. It seems a little unlikely that that could be achieved by bouncing light around in a box on some scales; we'd have noticed already.
And also WTF has making some sensitive scales got to do with controlling gravity? That was the massive non sequitur with which they finished the programme.
And also WTF has making some sensitive scales got to do with controlling gravity? That was the massive non sequitur with which they finished the programme.
ATG said:
Programme's reporting of emdrive was a bit schizophrenic. They showed a very careful reproduction of the inventor's kit stuck in a vacuum demonstratively producing no thrust. That rather suggests that, as you'd expect, it doesn't work. The conservation of momentum is a completely fundamental concept. If it is wrong, all physical laws proposed to date are completely undermined. It seems a little unlikely that that could be achieved by bouncing light around in a box on some scales; we'd have noticed already.
And also WTF has making some sensitive scales got to do with controlling gravity? That was the massive non sequitur with which they finished the programme.
Er.. No it didn't. It showed it producing a thrust vertically irrespective of how the apparatus was oriented. Go stick it on iplayer and watch it again.And also WTF has making some sensitive scales got to do with controlling gravity? That was the massive non sequitur with which they finished the programme.
Wrt the sensitive scales, again go and watch it again. You're right, it certainly isn't controlling gravity but what it demonstrated was quite extraordinary.
XM5ER said:
ATG said:
Programme's reporting of emdrive was a bit schizophrenic. They showed a very careful reproduction of the inventor's kit stuck in a vacuum demonstratively producing no thrust. That rather suggests that, as you'd expect, it doesn't work. The conservation of momentum is a completely fundamental concept. If it is wrong, all physical laws proposed to date are completely undermined. It seems a little unlikely that that could be achieved by bouncing light around in a box on some scales; we'd have noticed already.
And also WTF has making some sensitive scales got to do with controlling gravity? That was the massive non sequitur with which they finished the programme.
Er.. No it didn't. It showed it producing a thrust vertically irrespective of how the apparatus was oriented. Go stick it on iplayer and watch it again.And also WTF has making some sensitive scales got to do with controlling gravity? That was the massive non sequitur with which they finished the programme.
Wrt the sensitive scales, again go and watch it again. You're right, it certainly isn't controlling gravity but what it demonstrated was quite extraordinary.
And what am I supposed to have missed about the sensitive scales? It was sensitive enough to detect the field strength of about 80kg at 1m. That is very sensitive. What has that got to say about the physics of gravity? Nothing at all.
ATG said:
With respect, I think you may have misunderstood the emdrive result. Watch it again and listen to what the experimenter says about what you're calling a "vertical thrust". The gulf between the inventor's claim and the experimental result is irreconcilable.
And what am I supposed to have missed about the sensitive scales? It was sensitive enough to detect the field strength of about 80kg at 1m. That is very sensitive. What has that got to say about the physics of gravity? Nothing at all.
Note to self; don't post after several beers. Sorry about the arsey tone.And what am I supposed to have missed about the sensitive scales? It was sensitive enough to detect the field strength of about 80kg at 1m. That is very sensitive. What has that got to say about the physics of gravity? Nothing at all.
I am going to that as I missed the first 10 minutes or so. I didn't see the irreconcilable difference but I will watch it again.
WRT the "scales" something that is so sensitive that it can detect the gravitational field of something the has a mass of only 80KG is astonishing. Traditional scales only measure the effect of the earth's gravitational field on something that has a mass of 80kg. The program was a mess though, it almost as if the producer just had absolutely no clue about gravity at all. pedant: Even the feller that was describing how weak gravity is got it wrong, it was the surface friction resulting from the magnetic field that overcame gravity in that case, not magnetism itself (had he stuck it underneath the car then he'd have been right). /pedant
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff