Gravity Manipulation: Can It Be Done? Research for Hard SF World

In summary, the conversation discusses the possibility of gravity manipulation in science fiction and whether it is scientifically plausible. Some authors have explored the idea, but it is generally considered not scientifically sound. There are some semi-plausible ideas involving hyper-dense materials or gravity waves, but they are still on the fringe of possibility. Some propose using constant acceleration as a means of artificial gravity, but the power source is still unknown. The concept of anti-gravity is also discussed, with some pointing out that it is not possible according to current understanding of gravity. However, there is some speculation about negative energy and its potential for manipulating gravity. Overall, while the idea of gravity manipulation may make for interesting science fiction, it is not currently feasible according to scientific understanding.
  • #36
Poor Reasoning


Danger said:
Hi, folks;
Think I'll go check out those links. If the guy thinks that Uri Gellar was anything more than a good sleight-of-hand artist, he's for sure nuts. One thing to mention: the expansion of the universe has nothing to do with gravity. It's the space-time itself that's expanding, not the stuff in it. The regions of space that contain the stars and galaxies are moving away from each other uniformly, but the bodies are not separating within them. They remain gravitationally bound. The molecules in a chocolate chip don't move apart just because the chips themselves mutually recede during baking.
I fail to understand the wholesale condemnation of Puthoff because he dealt in some ideas you reject. This is not scientific investigation. As Mark Twain said, "The best way to get a sure thing on a fact is to go and examine it for yourself, and not take anybody's say-so." If you wish to refute Puthoff for his ideas, here is the math and the theory:Zero-Point Fluctuations . I am sorry that it is a PDF file. I hate them, myself. If you wish to know more about what Puthoff is saying, go to More Puthoff .
I am not being a Puthoff proponent here. I am just saying it is ridiculous to condemn wholesale anything based upon false reasoning. Lots of people hold all kinds of ideas, both brilliant and bizarre. Disproving the theory on observation and math is the only route for scientists. Further, there is nothing inherently wrong in any idea being controversial. SR and GR were extremely controversial. They stun the mind even today. It is the controversial we NEED.
I do believe that something on the order of Puthoff's ideas will be proven true.
I cannot concede that ridicule alone, such as is displayed in the links included above, demonstrates anything. As Mark Twain also said, "There is no character, howsoever good and fine, but can be destroyed by ridicule, howsoever poor and witless. Observe the ass, for instance: his
character is about perfect, he is the choicest spirit among all the humbler
animals, yet see what ridicule has brought him to. Instead of feeling
complimented when we are called an ass, we are left in doubt." For all I know, the person who posts the ridicule believes all sorts of ludicrous things. After all, don't we all?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
i think it was in a brian green book i read that said at the initial big bang era there was a moment where matter/energy became so dense that gravity actually became a replusive force? any way to harness that in a 5x5 coffee table cover? that would make a great conversation piece next to my aquarium :)
 
  • #38
Well I found a possible means to hold something against a planet's, star's or other mass' gravity. They're called orbital rings. Check out the idea here--> http://www.paulbirch.net/ Scroll down past the talk of church and ethics and you'll see the links. I've fallen in love with those suprastellar planets; what a neat idea. I'm not going to write a book any longer though. I did find a creative outlet though. Called www.orionsarm.com
 
  • #39
Here is something that I fould on the inter-web last year but have lost it again, it was gravity manipulator that twisted space-time due to frame dragging (an unproven effect postulated by einstien?).
This "Twister device" was a regular large heavy spinning mass that twisted space-time along with it.
This effect would not do anything on its own, but a few of these devices in conjuntion could focus this effect on 2 points outside of the machine, a positive gravity diffence at the front and a negative gratity difference at the back.
This was the only gravity manipulator on the net that I have found that I believe would work.

results of gravity probe B pending.
 
  • #41
Non Physics person here. I saw a youtube video featuring an engineer who had worked in aeronautics. He said he took two magnets and forced them together - north pole to north pole, south to south. He bolted them together with a brass bolt. He found when he dropped the double magnets from atop a tower, the mated magnets dropped slower than another item that he dropped. This was reproducible. Always the same result. Apparently there is an appendage to the gravity formula, with a magnetism element. Best wishes to everyone working on gravity manipulation.
 
  • #42
Can you link to that video, cpacapt?
 
  • #43
hey all

ill admit that I am not among the most knowledgeable on this subject i have previously looked up the topic of gravitational manipulation...

while not a genious in the field of physics i do have a rudimentary understanding of it thanks to the us navy's naval nuclear power training comand... lol

as one person mentioned gravity may very well be a sort of "wave" if you will, if so you need not switch polarity, but to conceiveably change phase by... let's say "180 degrees", that would negate the net force of gravity acting on an object

hope that idea helps
 
Back
Top