Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

Feb 19, 2004, 06:17 pm

Many scientists believe that it is folly to believe in such a thing, many believe it will be the start of a whole new world. Effecient, effective, and very useful. Bla bla bla, but how can it be done? I have a few theories of my own but I would also like to hear yours. First let me give you a basic understanding of how gravity works. Gravity is soley dependent(so scientist say) on mass. But many things have an impact on the way it works(density). A black hole is theorized to be 3 meters wide. Yeah, the most destructive force in the universe, a vaccum even light cannot escape, is only 3 meters wide. I'm not going to give you a entire background gravity, if you're reading this you better already know at least a minute amount. A white hole however is theorized to be an exact opposite of a black hole(says Stephen Hawkings). But how could something have an opposite effect of gravity? If we do not know of a force opposite of gravity how did Stephen theorize a white hole?(I'm sure there is an explanation to that I just want to know the answer)I know we won't answer all of these questions especially ones as complex as anti-gravity, but who knows maybe someone has something to say I've never heard before. Please forgive the lack scientific explaination, or fatuous sounding questions. I hope you are aware that not everyone who responds will be a physicists.

**Pooeypants** · Feb 19, 2004, 06:41 pm

It depends on the mass of the blackhole that dictates it's size, so not all of them are 3 metre's in diameter.

And if we want to speak scientifically here, we should say Hawking's hypothesized the existence of white holes, there is no evidence for them yet and hence the model cannot be a theory.

Mathieu · Feb 19, 2004, 07:14 pm

Well one of the competitor for "anti-gravity" is dark energy , wich is the energy contained in the vacuum. This energy is supposed to act as the Einstein cosmological constant.Some sort of repulsive gravity. There is many hypothesis about this energy and we don't know too much on it. Some version of the brane theory have tried to explian this by installing the universe in a higher dimensionnal frame in a way analog to a membrane in 3D . each bran in this frame share gravity with the other. The brane could also bent on it self in the higher dimensions , with each fold interacting with thier close folds. Gravitron , in string theory, would be represented by a string closed on itself, and would not be embedded in any space frame, hence they could travel from brane to brane or folds to folds in the higher dimensional frame.Resulting in this effect of "anti-gravity". But that is quite speculative...

**Pooeypants** · Feb 19, 2004, 07:32 pm

P-brane model has got my head in a muddle.

Plaything48 · Feb 20, 2004, 07:15 am

Gravity is just a force, and a very weak one at that. All forces are "exchange particles" and in theory there's an anti particle for every particle. So when they find the graviton, they may just find the anti-graviton. How it would work though, I have no idea?????

Mathieu · Feb 20, 2004, 07:35 am

Gravity is a force yeah, but it is much more than that !!

Graviton , like photons, are their own anti-particle.

Feb 22, 2004, 03:00 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Pooeypants,)
It depends on the mass of the blackhole that dictates it's size, so not all of them are 3 metre's in diameter.

And if we want to speak scientifically here, we should say Hawking's hypothesized the existence of white holes, there is no evidence for them yet and hence the model cannot etc cannot be a theory.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

All gravity depends on mass. What were you trying to say? Black Holes are the mass of a star, but compressed to around 3 meters. So mass and density determine amount of gravity.

Feb 22, 2004, 03:08 pm

I've heard little about dark energy except for the quick explanation of why the universe expansion is accelerating . I believe there is something else behind the expansion which might not concur with thermodynamics and that is why scientists had to think of something fast which might ease that conclusion. They do cite believable theories but how much do we really know. Every 100 years we say something is cement and then it turns to shit.

Mathieu · Feb 22, 2004, 03:38 pm

Not concur with thermodynamics ? Explain! What do you mean ?

**Pooeypants** · Feb 22, 2004, 04:08 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (theophysics,)
I've heard little about dark energy except for the quick explanation of why the universe expansion is accelerating . I believe there is something else behind the expansion which might not concur with thermodynamics and that is why scientists had to think of something fast which might ease that conclusion. They do cite believable theories but how much do we really know. Every 100 years we say something is cement and then it turns to shit.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Very few things are absolute in science, the good side to this is that we aren't bound to be static, if we observe new data that contradicts current science, we will adapt our models to suit if need be.

whl626 · Mar 4, 2004, 10:04 pm

hopefully one day we can develop a machine that can defy the gravity and make us fly like bird :)

tman_ndsu08 · Mar 4, 2004, 10:32 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Plaything48,)
Gravity is just a force, and a very weak one at that. All forces are "exchange particles" and in theory there's an anti particle for every particle. So when they find the graviton, they may just find the anti-graviton. How it would work though, I have no idea?????<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

It's very possible i'm over simplifying here...but gravity acts upon particles.

Plaything48 · Mar 5, 2004, 05:32 am

hardly, the force is so small its almost negligible

**Pooeypants** · Mar 5, 2004, 08:58 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (theophysics,)

All gravity depends on mass. What were you trying to say? Black Holes are the mass of a star, but compressed to around 3 meters. So mass and density determine amount of gravity.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Not all black holes have same mass hence different schwarzchild radius. Although technically, a singularity has zero volume, do we define black holes as the boundary of the event horizon?

tman_ndsu08 · Mar 5, 2004, 12:47 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Plaything48,)
hardly, the force is so small its almost negligible<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Do you understand what i'm saying? Gravity is the force that draws particles together. So a way to look at it is gravity can't be a particle because gravity acts on particles...so it would just be acting on itself.

Mathieu · Mar 5, 2004, 02:11 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (tman_ndsu08,)
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Plaything48,)
hardly, the force is so small its almost negligible<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Do you understand what i'm saying? Gravity is the force that draws particles together. So a way to look at it is gravity can't be a particle because gravity acts on particles...so it would just be acting on itself.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Do you really know what your talking about ?

Each forces have its exchange particles. Photons for EM, W and Z bosons for weak nuclear force, gluons for strong nuclear force, and the hypothesis is there the graviton is the exchange particle in quantum gravity ...

tman_ndsu08 · Mar 5, 2004, 04:00 pm

No, i don't know what i'm talking about, actually.

When you're saying "particle", however, i tend to think of a small moving peice of mass. Gravity acts upon mass.

mlingley · Mar 5, 2004, 04:25 pm

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that super-conductors had anti-gravity properties. Anybody know if this is true? I was told that if you pass electricity through a super-conductor they get lighter.

tusaki · Mar 5, 2004, 04:45 pm

Putting 'super conductor gravity' through google yields some interesting results (not that I have any clue, but I can google!

):

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by

There is some experimental evidence [Podkletnov] for an unexpected interaction between gravitational fields and a toroidal rotating disk consisting of ordinary and superconducting layers and levitating in a vertical magnetic field created by AC currents. It seems that the gravitational force in a cylindrical region above the super conductor is reduced by about one percent. The effect seems to be enhanced by the rotation of the disk. The effect has no obvious explanation in standard General Relativity. Modanese has suggested an explanation based on the interaction of the Cooper pair Bose Einstein condensate with gravitational field leading to a generation of an effective local cosmological term [Modanese].
<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

source: http://www.physics.helsinki.fi/~matpitka/antigr.html

Plaything48 · Mar 5, 2004, 06:33 pm

Just wanna tell ya that gravity isn't what draws particles together at all, but ill let you do your own research on that.

Feb 19, 2004, 06:41 pm	#2 (permalink) (top)
Pooeypants Neo Moderator Location: England Posts: 5,468	It depends on the mass of the blackhole that dictates it's size, so not all of them are 3 metre's in diameter. And if we want to speak scientifically here, we should say Hawking's hypothesized the existence of white holes, there is no evidence for them yet and hence the model cannot be a theory. War is Peace Freedom is Slavery Ignorance is strength Harness the power of Ingsoc, then you can capture someone killed the year before

Feb 19, 2004, 07:32 pm	#4 (permalink) (top)
Pooeypants Neo Moderator Location: England Posts: 5,468	P-brane model has got my head in a muddle. War is Peace Freedom is Slavery Ignorance is strength Harness the power of Ingsoc, then you can capture someone killed the year before

Feb 20, 2004, 07:15 am	#5 (permalink) (top)
Plaything48 Igneous Magma Location: London baby, yeah! Posts: 198	Gravity is just a force, and a very weak one at that. All forces are "exchange particles" and in theory there's an anti particle for every particle. So when they find the graviton, they may just find the anti-graviton. How it would work though, I have no idea????? A man has two reasons for doing anything --- a good reason and the real reason. Let us be thankful for the fools. But for them the rest of us could not succeed In spite of the cost of living, it's still popular.

Feb 22, 2004, 03:00 pm	#7 (permalink) (top)
theophysics Guest Posts: n/a	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Pooeypants,) It depends on the mass of the blackhole that dictates it's size, so not all of them are 3 metre's in diameter. And if we want to speak scientifically here, we should say Hawking's hypothesized the existence of white holes, there is no evidence for them yet and hence the model cannot etc cannot be a theory.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> All gravity depends on mass. What were you trying to say? Black Holes are the mass of a star, but compressed to around 3 meters. So mass and density determine amount of gravity.

Feb 22, 2004, 04:08 pm	#10 (permalink) (top)
Pooeypants Neo Moderator Location: England Posts: 5,468	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (theophysics,) I've heard little about dark energy except for the quick explanation of why the universe expansion is accelerating . I believe there is something else behind the expansion which might not concur with thermodynamics and that is why scientists had to think of something fast which might ease that conclusion. They do cite believable theories but how much do we really know. Every 100 years we say something is cement and then it turns to shit.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Very few things are absolute in science, the good side to this is that we aren't bound to be static, if we observe new data that contradicts current science, we will adapt our models to suit if need be. War is Peace Freedom is Slavery Ignorance is strength Harness the power of Ingsoc, then you can capture someone killed the year before

Feb 19, 2004, 06:17 pm	#1 (permalink) (top)
theophysics Guest Posts: n/a	Many scientists believe that it is folly to believe in such a thing, many believe it will be the start of a whole new world. Effecient, effective, and very useful. Bla bla bla, but how can it be done? I have a few theories of my own but I would also like to hear yours. First let me give you a basic understanding of how gravity works. Gravity is soley dependent(so scientist say) on mass. But many things have an impact on the way it works(density). A black hole is theorized to be 3 meters wide. Yeah, the most destructive force in the universe, a vaccum even light cannot escape, is only 3 meters wide. I'm not going to give you a entire background gravity, if you're reading this you better already know at least a minute amount. A white hole however is theorized to be an exact opposite of a black hole(says Stephen Hawkings). But how could something have an opposite effect of gravity? If we do not know of a force opposite of gravity how did Stephen theorize a white hole?(I'm sure there is an explanation to that I just want to know the answer)I know we won't answer all of these questions especially ones as complex as anti-gravity, but who knows maybe someone has something to say I've never heard before. Please forgive the lack scientific explaination, or fatuous sounding questions. I hope you are aware that not everyone who responds will be a physicists.

Feb 19, 2004, 07:14 pm	#3 (permalink) (top)
Mathieu Igneous Magma Location: Montreal Posts: 216	Well one of the competitor for "anti-gravity" is dark energy , wich is the energy contained in the vacuum. This energy is supposed to act as the Einstein cosmological constant.Some sort of repulsive gravity. There is many hypothesis about this energy and we don't know too much on it. Some version of the brane theory have tried to explian this by installing the universe in a higher dimensionnal frame in a way analog to a membrane in 3D . each bran in this frame share gravity with the other. The brane could also bent on it self in the higher dimensions , with each fold interacting with thier close folds. Gravitron , in string theory, would be represented by a string closed on itself, and would not be embedded in any space frame, hence they could travel from brane to brane or folds to folds in the higher dimensional frame.Resulting in this effect of "anti-gravity". But that is quite speculative...

Feb 20, 2004, 07:35 am	#6 (permalink) (top)
Mathieu Igneous Magma Location: Montreal Posts: 216	Gravity is a force yeah, but it is much more than that !! Graviton , like photons, are their own anti-particle.

Feb 22, 2004, 03:08 pm	#8 (permalink) (top)
theophysics Guest Posts: n/a	I've heard little about dark energy except for the quick explanation of why the universe expansion is accelerating . I believe there is something else behind the expansion which might not concur with thermodynamics and that is why scientists had to think of something fast which might ease that conclusion. They do cite believable theories but how much do we really know. Every 100 years we say something is cement and then it turns to shit.

Feb 22, 2004, 03:38 pm	#9 (permalink) (top)
Mathieu Igneous Magma Location: Montreal Posts: 216	Not concur with thermodynamics ? Explain! What do you mean ?

Mar 4, 2004, 10:04 pm	#11 (permalink) (top)
whl626 Sedimentary Rock Posts: 11	hopefully one day we can develop a machine that can defy the gravity and make us fly like bird :) Learn English every day http://englishdaily626.com http://foreseefuture.com - Foresee your future

Mar 4, 2004, 10:32 pm	#12 (permalink) (top)
tman_ndsu08 BANNED Posts: 5,021	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Plaything48,) Gravity is just a force, and a very weak one at that. All forces are "exchange particles" and in theory there's an anti particle for every particle. So when they find the graviton, they may just find the anti-graviton. How it would work though, I have no idea?????<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> It's very possible i'm over simplifying here...but gravity acts upon particles.

Mar 5, 2004, 05:32 am	#13 (permalink) (top)
Plaything48 Igneous Magma Location: London baby, yeah! Posts: 198	hardly, the force is so small its almost negligible A man has two reasons for doing anything --- a good reason and the real reason. Let us be thankful for the fools. But for them the rest of us could not succeed In spite of the cost of living, it's still popular.

Mar 5, 2004, 08:58 am	#14 (permalink) (top)
Pooeypants Neo Moderator Location: England Posts: 5,468	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (theophysics,) All gravity depends on mass. What were you trying to say? Black Holes are the mass of a star, but compressed to around 3 meters. So mass and density determine amount of gravity.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Not all black holes have same mass hence different schwarzchild radius. Although technically, a singularity has zero volume, do we define black holes as the boundary of the event horizon? War is Peace Freedom is Slavery Ignorance is strength Harness the power of Ingsoc, then you can capture someone killed the year before

Mar 5, 2004, 12:47 pm	#15 (permalink) (top)
tman_ndsu08 BANNED Posts: 5,021	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Plaything48,) hardly, the force is so small its almost negligible<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Do you understand what i'm saying? Gravity is the force that draws particles together. So a way to look at it is gravity can't be a particle because gravity acts on particles...so it would just be acting on itself.

Mar 5, 2004, 02:11 pm	#16 (permalink) (top)
Mathieu Igneous Magma Location: Montreal Posts: 216	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (tman_ndsu08,) </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Plaything48,) hardly, the force is so small its almost negligible<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Do you understand what i'm saying? Gravity is the force that draws particles together. So a way to look at it is gravity can't be a particle because gravity acts on particles...so it would just be acting on itself.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Do you really know what your talking about ? Each forces have its exchange particles. Photons for EM, W and Z bosons for weak nuclear force, gluons for strong nuclear force, and the hypothesis is there the graviton is the exchange particle in quantum gravity ...

Mar 5, 2004, 04:00 pm	#17 (permalink) (top)
tman_ndsu08 BANNED Posts: 5,021	No, i don't know what i'm talking about, actually. When you're saying "particle", however, i tend to think of a small moving peice of mass. Gravity acts upon mass.

Mar 5, 2004, 04:25 pm	#18 (permalink) (top)
mlingley Molten Ash Posts: 120	Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that super-conductors had anti-gravity properties. Anybody know if this is true? I was told that if you pass electricity through a super-conductor they get lighter.

Mar 5, 2004, 04:45 pm	#19 (permalink) (top)
tusaki Playful Location: Groningen, the Netherlands Posts: 805	Putting 'super conductor gravity' through google yields some interesting results (not that I have any clue, but I can google! ): </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by There is some experimental evidence [Podkletnov] for an unexpected interaction between gravitational fields and a toroidal rotating disk consisting of ordinary and superconducting layers and levitating in a vertical magnetic field created by AC currents. It seems that the gravitational force in a cylindrical region above the super conductor is reduced by about one percent. The effect seems to be enhanced by the rotation of the disk. The effect has no obvious explanation in standard General Relativity. Modanese has suggested an explanation based on the interaction of the Cooper pair Bose Einstein condensate with gravitational field leading to a generation of an effective local cosmological term [Modanese]. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> source: http://www.physics.helsinki.fi/~matpitka/antigr.html Hope & Dream

Mar 5, 2004, 06:33 pm	#20 (permalink) (top)
Plaything48 Igneous Magma Location: London baby, yeah! Posts: 198	Just wanna tell ya that gravity isn't what draws particles together at all, but ill let you do your own research on that. A man has two reasons for doing anything --- a good reason and the real reason. Let us be thankful for the fools. But for them the rest of us could not succeed In spite of the cost of living, it's still popular.