anti-gravity?

I do know how to spell... most of the time. educatded

that-physics-says-shouldnt-work-just-produced-enough-thrust-to-defeat-> earths-gravity/>

I wouldn’t invest if I were you.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Then it should float in mid-air, or accelerate upward. So why does it need to be tested in space?

It's fun to look at older thedebrief miracles that, so far, haven't happened.

There’s no gravity gravy train if it gets debunked on the first day. What’s the use of that?

I prefer to keep my briefs, thanks. ;)

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

I don't have (and wouldn't anyway ) anything to invest.

You've answered my question. For that I say, THANKS!

I'm sure that one day, sometime, it'll work.

Powered by cold fusion, no doubt...

To avoid embarrassment when it doesn't actually work as claimed!

Surely it is yet another standard pump and dump models for dodgy fringe science IPOs much like the LENR scams that have been around for decades.

Some genuine engineers who didn't properly understand the physics of gyroscopes have famously announced their anti gravity machines.

Most notably one Eric Laithwaite who once gave the Royal Institution Xmas Lectures in 1966 on magnetic levitation and linear motors before he quite literally went off the rails in 1974.

Great communicator with the public but not very good at physics.

I'm not sure that that is piling Pelion on Ossa. Anti-gravity is even more unlikely than cold fusion.

Vacuum to get rid of corona.

Space (orbit really) so tiny forces can be detected and measured.

A steady one G acceleration would be pretty impressive, and would settle the issue.

Yeah. Investment not recommended.

As for our asymmetrical capacitor fellow, there has to be some big errors in the derivation. I watched part of his lecture, where he did note that this force endured even when the HV was turned off, and that it should therefore accelerate continuously. Which it doesn't, despite his theory. He knew that this was a problem, but figured that it was fixable. Hmm.

That fellow reminds me of the inventor I met, described in the SED thread "Non-Inertial Navigation Technology" (July 2020). That company still exists, and he still toils away. I don't know where the money comes from.

Joe Gwinn

And then there was the Dean drive, which worked by rattling a mass back and forth inside a vehicle.

The tabletop demo went perfectly. ;)

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Right month. Wrong day. Ed

Yeah, I remember that story. I bet that if one simply suspended the dean drive assembly from a rafter using a long spring, no net motion would be seen.

I will say that with Non-Inertial Navigation, after talking with the inventor on a video conference, my instinct was that he was sincere but misguided.

After watching the asymmetrical capacitor video presentation, my instinct is that the inventor is a complete huckster, and does know better, as I watched him deftly include everything likely to impress the relevant audience, up to and including perpetual motion, free energy, and alien technology. But no warp drive.

As for Dean, I have no idea, but tend towards pure huckster.

Joe Gwinn

So the failure can be blamed on the Farnsworth multipactor effect.

I went to one of his RI Christmas Lecture series (and several other Xmas lectures). He could easily have killed somebody in the audience when he demonstrated an electromagnetic gun. The projectile was fired into a target made of several stacked sheets of timber blockboard. It penetrated much deeper than expected and partly emerged from the other side - just in front of a member of the audience. As usual with such events, not everything was as it might have seemed to the TV audience. Apparently, the children "randomly" selected to help with demonstrations were often those of the producer.

John

Has anyone come across the alternative theory of gravity which I first heard of from P.G.A.H. Voigt?

It suggests that the current theory of gravity is rather like the idea we used to have that there was force 'due to vacuum', rather than air pressure. It proposes that the real cause of the gravitational effects we observe is not an attraction but a pressure.

The concept is that a force acts on all bodies equally in all dirctions. When two bodies with mass approach each other, each shields the other from some of this force and the remaining forces propel the bodies towards each other.

I don't know how it would be possible to test whether this was in fact how 'gravity' worked and whether it was possible to differentiate it from the current theory, as the two would appear to have identical observed effects.

Powered by an inexhaustible supply of flying pigs this invention will revolutionise world transport and sales of heavy duty umbrellas!

There are space vehicle qualifying hard vacuum facilities on the ground. If this thing can generate 1g it could levitate inside there.

The guy claims 1g acceleration. 1g of continuous acceleration is enough to reach the centre of our galaxy in about 20 years if memory serves.

I might believe 1 G (as in the gravitational constant ie thermal noise) but not 1g acceleration due to gravity at the Earth's surface.

As always from gullible suckers with more money than sense. The most successful recent high profile scam took in a lot of experienced investors who should have known better or employed people who did. Elizabeth Holmes at Theranos managed to almost pull it off too.

But if you want a real example of how to do it big time then the vanishing OneCoin crypto queen has to be it.

A successful $4bn scam is very impressive! FOMO drives these bubbles.

I suppose so, but he was talking of corona in much higher air pressures than multipactors require. Think corona as seen around HV lines.

Joe Gwinn

It was an interesting explanation in the light of the way things were thought of at the time: physical particles and elastic collisions. Voight's explanation makes sense if you simply conside "a force" without trying to evoke an explanation for that force. We can be fairly certain it isn't caused by physical particles or electromagnetic waves, but who is to say there isn't another 'thing' in space that we haven't identified yet.

I agree with you: rather than saying this theory is impossible because we don't know anything that could cause it, why don't we say this theory could point to something we don't know about yet.