# Anti-gravity Theory

#### Reluctantly

##### Resident disMember
So let's say you take a disc or sphere and on the thrust side of the ship you have electromagnetic coils.

So you could take the following

and take those electromagnetic coils, but direct them downward so that the magnetic field induced by the electric current is faced downward at your thrust side of your ship. Then all you need is two things:
1. A high enough voltage (and current) through the coils to magnetize any material below them.
2. A high enough frequency of alternating-current through the coils to react against the induced magnetic orientation of any matter below it. In other words, you don't allow the matter below you to align with the magnetic field induced by the coils because you change it so fast, but at the same time have such a strong changing magnetic field that the matter below you can not interlock with it and instead has to resist the ship, creating thrust. It's the equivalent of creating centrifugal force against the atoms of the matter that is below you.

So is this possible? In theory, it could be tested best in water, since water is a dipole. It would be a great improvement over something like DC EM propulsion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetohydrodynamic_drive) in say water that only uses the weak forced generated by the spinning of a magnetic field against the current flow of an electric field to pull electrons to one side and creates a weak thrust.

#### Grayman

##### Team Ignorant
Nvm seems right. Would the magnetic wave interfere with intself and cancel itself out at higher frequencies?

#### Reluctantly

##### Resident disMember
Well, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paramagnetism is typically used to increase the magnetic field created by the current. You place something like this in the core and then whatever magnetic field is directed by the current is also amplified to an extent. But these devices have current directed magnetic fields, so by changing the current direction, you also change the direction of the current's magnetic field.

#### Grayman

##### Team Ignorant
Like a marble sitting on a vibrating surface? It somewhat floats.

#### Reluctantly

##### Resident disMember
Well, in theory it can't cancel itself out unless you have infinite frequency, but that's a good question.

I would imagine if you had a high enough frequency with a strong enough magnetic field that you'd still react against that matter, but the matter would not change very much. In theory, the bigger the current's magnetic field and higher the frequency, the more thrust without effecting the matter thrusted off of?

Actually, yes I think it would be like a marble on a vibrating surface. Except the marble is also vibrating, so by increasing the vibration of the surface, you get a thrusting force (or vice versa).

#### Turnevies

##### Active Member
If your magnetic field is rapidly oscillating on a timescale where the matter below remains stationary, this means that there is repulsion half of the time and attraction the other half of the time, or am I missing something?

#### Grayman

##### Team Ignorant
If your magnetic field is rapidly oscillating on a timescale where the matter below remains stationary, this means that there is repulsion half of the time and attraction the other half of the time, or am I missing something?
What if it is over an iron surface? The plate would absorb the magnetic energy and then slowly disappate but if you switch polarities before it can? Maybe go back and forth increasing intensity during the dissipation as you switch I think you could gain some rise until you reached maximum output and the system began to equalize.

Slow motion magintize the plate for one minute then swap polarities to get rise. While object is risen, increase frequency to 5milliseconds magnetization period and 5 milliseconds rise period so that the object only falls for 5 milliseconds having no time to really move. Increase magnetization during the magnetization period but decrease magnetization time and increase rise period decrease intensity during rise in order to gain overall rise due to the fall period being shorter and the rise period being longer.

#### Grayman

##### Team Ignorant
Something to due with electromagnets that increase the mass of ejected particles?

I know they do something like that prior to the collusionof particles in a particle accellerator but I dont know how it works exactly.

#### Cognisant

##### Condescending Bastard
As something approaches the speed of light its mass increases exponentially but it has to be moving near the speed of light before this becomes noticeable. An ion drive ionizes a gas (making it magnetic) and uses an extremely powerful magnetic field to propel this ionized gas to as close to light speed as possible thereby getting the most thrust (not energy, this is only a propulsion mechanism) out of the smallest amount of fuel.

Pretty much what the OP described except it's not anti-gravity but rather a very fuel efficient form of propulsion, assuming you are getting your energy from solar power and you don't need to accelerate quickly.

High thrust output ion drives are a big engineering challenge.

#### Reluctantly

##### Resident disMember
So...I probably should have waited to post this; I'm really busy right now, but I'd like to present my understanding of physics and what I'm proposing so there isn't any confusion about what we talk about. I'll get back on either Thursday night or sometime Friday when I'm not working 12 hour days.

Umm but what I'm proposing uses no propellant - ionizing gas to thrust off of is still using a propellant. I'm thinking more along the lines of thrust off of the magnetic forces inherent in nature. There doesn't need to be propellant, rather you energize the electromagnetic forces in nature to create attraction and repulsion.

#### Cognisant

##### Condescending Bastard
It is technically possible to magnetically levitate something upon the Earth's magnetic field but that involves using mind boggling amounts of energy, put simply (inaccurately) you're not levitating yourself off the Earth but rather creating a field of such intensity it's pushing the planet away from you. The Earth with its north and south magnetic poles is one giant magnet, it's magnetic field is much bigger than the planet itself BUT the intensity of this magnetic field is on our scale extremely weak, trying to catch a lift on it is like trying to propel a ship on the slightest whiff of a breeze by using a really big sail, except in this case the sail is pushing against the atmosphere and the air is really thin... This is really hard to describe.

Earth's magnetic field = Big Bubble.
You need another big bubble to push against the earth's big bubble because a small bubble will just enter the big bubble because it's more pointy.

...eh good enough.

Anyway magnetic fields decrease in intensity exponentially from their source and space is huge, just mind mindbogglingly big, so you don't have to go far until the Earth's magnetic field simply ceases to exist and the Sun's magnetic field although extremely powerful is also so far away as to be effectively nonexistent.

Now if your idea is to ionize and propel virtual particles to relativistic speeds well there's already something that does that, a black hole, if you've somehow created a magnetic field powerful enough to emit hawking radiation you can brag to any alien out there and they'll be impressed, also more than a little bit terrified.

#### Cognisant

##### Condescending Bastard
There is a way to propel a craft in space without ejecting any mass and it's by making gravity waves, the faster something goes the more inertia (stored energy) it has, the more energy it has the more mass it has because they're kinda sorta the same thing. If you have a set of oars and you wave them fast enough as their tips approach the speed of light their inertia/mass increases exponentially, as does the gravity well proportional to that inertia/mass.

So if you wave these oars at 0.9999999% of the speed of light in one direction and 0.8% in the other you'll be literally rowing your boat forwards in empty space.

#### Reluctantly

##### Resident disMember
Well, what you're really describing is a DC drive. There is an ac component to all matter. For example, atoms in a circuit give off light, which is caused by the alternating flux of their kinetic energy. In other words, an electric circuit causes a magnetic alignment of matter, which allows electrons to flow in an organized manner, resulting in a perpendicular emitting of EM radiation to the conductor. In fact, radio waves and the whole of em radiation is simply the kinetic energy of the magnetic fields inherent in the spin of electrons.

I mean you can annihilate particles and create them as well. Two photons (which can be created from an electric circuit) can collide and create matter. And a positron can annihilate an electron, if they collide. To a lot of people, this is strange. But Tesla knew that matter is the ether in motion. In other words, the vacuum of space is devoid of motion, but full of matter. A photon travels through this stationary ether by temporarily stimulating it (giving it motion), spinning it one way and then spinning it another, as it propagates, and creating a channel to propagate. This stationary ether can be tapped into with ac circuits to create propulsion in space by creating matter from the ether. It's essentially the basis of Nasa's EM drive, I imagine. And it doesn't contradict the Michelson-Morley experiment because the ether is inherently stationary.

But to create an anti-gravity drive on Earth you simply need to tap into the alternating aspect of matter. In other words, you stimulate the matter below the ship so that you stretch the matter apart. And create matter to propell of off in the vacuum of space.

#### Cognisant

##### Condescending Bastard
There's no ether.

#### Reluctantly

##### Resident disMember
Very thoughtful and constructive response.

#### Grayman

##### Team Ignorant
There's no ether.
@Reluctantly
I will sy that if an ether does exist the M&M experiment proved that it is not stationary so I don't understand why you claim that it is consistent with their experiment...

#### TransientMoment

##### _ _ , - _ , _ -
I recall reading an article a long time ago about the possibility of launching microchips into space by having them propel themselves with the earth's magnetic field. They would, however, need to be boosted to the appropriate speed initially by means of a rocket. The biggest factor preventing their launch was probably the atmosphere potentially frying them to crisp. Then they really would be micro-chips. Ahahaha... bad pun.

#### Reluctantly

##### Resident disMember
@Reluctantly
I will sy that if an ether does exist the M&M experiment proved that it is not stationary so I don't understand why you claim that it is consistent with their experiment...
...

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson%E2%80%93Morley_experiment

They split a beam into perpendicular paths that recombined at an end point in order to see if one beam slowed down or sped up in relation to the other beam. This would prove an ether exists, as any velocity the ether has would show up as a difference in speeds of the perpendicular beams. This did not occur, so it was assumed the ether did not exist. All I'm saying...is it doesn't prove it doesn't exist, but that it could be stationary...not sure why this is met with so much resistance really...and I don't know how you drew that conclusion?

...anyway, I actually don't want to talk about this anymore, at least not here. No one is very receptive to discussions like this and it's kind of a downer really. I guess I just find esoteric shit fascinating, so maybe this just isn't the place.

I recall reading an article a long time ago about the possibility of launching microchips into space by having them propel themselves with the earth's magnetic field. They would, however, need to be boosted to the appropriate speed initially by means of a rocket. The biggest factor preventing their launch was probably the atmosphere potentially frying them to crisp. Then they really would be micro-chips. Ahahaha... bad pun.
I remember a ways back about spaceships that could propel themselves away from the Earth's gravitational field with microwaves to power them. But I guess that didn't happen either. :/

I was looking at the Tesla Model 3 today and I didn't realize they have supercharging stations through out the country. So anyone could buy a tesla and charge them very fast on a long trip. I really hope the electric car replaces combustion cars. That shit is cool. It's time technology transitioned from the over 100 year old combustion engine. Maybe some day we will get past rockets too. But if I ever buy a new car, it'll definitely be a Tesla.

#### TransientMoment

##### _ _ , - _ , _ -
I was looking at the Tesla Model 3 today and I didn't realize they have supercharging stations through out the country. So anyone could buy a tesla and charge them very fast on a long trip.
Oh, that's interesting. I probably should've guessed that (there are stations), but as I haven't seen anyone, I wonder where they are hiding.
It's time technology transitioned from the over 100 year old combustion engine. Maybe some day we will get past rockets too. But if I ever buy a new car, it'll definitely be a Tesla.
Eheh eheh. Except that, what you don't see in the news: The Tesla vehicle batteries have to go somewhere. Batteries in general are very expensive but also pose a problem of disposal. You're average car battery is about the most wasteful, toxic thing you, the average consumer, could throw away. Even rechargeables (such as Lithium ion) reach a point where they can no longer be recharged. Given the rate at which people go through cars, that's an awful lot of batteries. Oil, on the other hand, is a plentiful resource. There isn't a scarcity. What people probably should be doing is coming up with more ways to use and convert (to other things) carbon dioxide rather than treating it as an unwanted step-child.
The reason combustion engines have been around for so long is that it's difficult to raise the efficiency of any motor. The real killer to gas mileage, though, is actually the wind-resistance on your vehicle. A company called Aptera designed a car with great efficiency, but they went out of business because they couldn't meet vehicle regulations (which were obviously written up for a standard kind of vehicle in mind) and went over-budget.

I'm not sure why you'd want to get past rockets. There is technically only one way to travel in space: Newton's 3rd. That leaves you with: rockets, ion-thrusters, or space sails (which are pretty cool, I'll admit). But only rockets will get you to space. Space towers are a nice thought, and they would be one way to avoid the issue of gravity, which also brings us back on topic (see what I did there XD). However, that leaves the issue of whether or not they will collapse.

#### sushi

##### Active Member
There's no ether.
that's very wrong, just because its undetectable doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

on thread topic, i believe it exist but just not detectable yet.