I have been involved in this area for a while via the Electric Spacecraft Journal connection with my good friend Charles Yost.
After a lot of work and even more thought, I have come to a simple and rather final conclusion. Based on experiments where any form of electrostatic operations occur, there is absolutely no way to definitively test any electrogravitic effects on this planet.
There is just too much local, bound up, charged matter that you cannot escape. Such matter, including the air itself, might react coulombically with such applied electrical methodologies to give an illusion of antigravitic action. The final arbiter on such concepts must be tested in the vacuum of space with no nearby material objects about. (I would think any planet or planetesimal should be over 2 million miles away.)
Only in this context can electrogravitic ideas be tested without localized interferance.
I personally believe that gravity has not even the remotest link to, or reaction with, any form of charge, electric field or electrodynamic action. They are totally, mutually exclusive and non-interactive, unrelated forces.
What gravity is and why it is ONLY attractive with no known or observed repulsive nature is as much of a mystery today as it was to the most savage of our ancestors.
Yes, there is lots of bluster, there are even a few theories ranging from the concept of curved space time to graviton particles. All are 100% speculation and fabrics of the mind and codified by mathematical machinations formed to match our limited experience. They all share a common link in that they give no clue whatsoever to the reality of what gravity is or its genuine causitive agent.
The offerings chase their own logical tail.
Curved space exists about large masses.....Why?....What in the matter makes space dimple?..............Why the graviton, of course...........How does the graviton know that locally it must be so weak as to be undetectable but at a distance, and with its nearby brothers in condensed matter, be so strong that it overrides all electrical forces?
In short, we consider ourselves to possess understanding only at the extremes but nothing in the middle.
Observing and mathematically codifying effects may make us predictive, but not necessarily wise.
Fusion would be much easier if we had even the slightest clue as to the realistic agents at work about gravity.
Richard Hull
GRAVITY? Ripples in space or ghost particles.
-
Richard Hull
- Moderator
- Posts: 15027
- Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
- Real name: Richard Hull
GRAVITY? Ripples in space or ghost particles.
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
Re: GRAVITY? Ripples in space or ghost particles.
I concur Richard. Very well put.
Would be first to say my insight of general relativity is limited. However in at least one extensive development of the Geometrodynamic theory of Gravity, ( Gravity, by Thorne, Meissner and Wheeler) it seems that a lot of emphasis is placed on the "reasonableness" of geodesic lines - or minimal lines - "straight" lines in a generalized concept of space or spacetime. Guess I am not far enough advanced, but these approaches seem to be more along the line of explanations from alternate viewpoints, rather than a fundamental explanation of what is going on. In other words.... the attraction that masses have on each other is assumed and this is just a way of looking at what happens.
To say masses create a "depression" in space time that curves it like a rubber sheet, making straight line paths curve too, while actually remaining straight.... doesn't explain anything to me. It just says, well you could look at it this way.. To which I say... right, gotcha. I see... but then what is this basic property that causes the "depression: in space-time?
And we are back at square one, not very much wiser, but with a definitely more exercised imagination!!
Not complaining, mind you. One needs to figure out a set of definitive experiments that can sort out the explanations. Bending light by matter was the starting point. Not clear to me, whether the effect was actually known before Einstein's theories predicted it or whether the unexplained phenomena was in the background subtlely guiding the theory.
Dave Cooper
Would be first to say my insight of general relativity is limited. However in at least one extensive development of the Geometrodynamic theory of Gravity, ( Gravity, by Thorne, Meissner and Wheeler) it seems that a lot of emphasis is placed on the "reasonableness" of geodesic lines - or minimal lines - "straight" lines in a generalized concept of space or spacetime. Guess I am not far enough advanced, but these approaches seem to be more along the line of explanations from alternate viewpoints, rather than a fundamental explanation of what is going on. In other words.... the attraction that masses have on each other is assumed and this is just a way of looking at what happens.
To say masses create a "depression" in space time that curves it like a rubber sheet, making straight line paths curve too, while actually remaining straight.... doesn't explain anything to me. It just says, well you could look at it this way.. To which I say... right, gotcha. I see... but then what is this basic property that causes the "depression: in space-time?
And we are back at square one, not very much wiser, but with a definitely more exercised imagination!!
Not complaining, mind you. One needs to figure out a set of definitive experiments that can sort out the explanations. Bending light by matter was the starting point. Not clear to me, whether the effect was actually known before Einstein's theories predicted it or whether the unexplained phenomena was in the background subtlely guiding the theory.
Dave Cooper
-
Richard Hull
- Moderator
- Posts: 15027
- Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:44 am
- Real name: Richard Hull
Re: GRAVITY? Ripples in space or ghost particles.
Dave is correct. The rubber sheet and depressions are just ways we can mentally view gravity effects easily. It is a mental construct and has no more ties to reality than do the imagined electrical or magnetic field lines so often referred to in electrodynamics.
The problem occurs when these "brain assits" are taken as how things are. They are not that way. There are no electric or magnetic field lines, no curvature of space around objects of mass, etc. However, all of these help us develop mathematically predictive structures based on observation of effects and all give ZERO clues as to the core causes of the effects observed. Quite the opposite! They often hobble us in the core level understanding as time goes on. We can use math based on these constructs to successfully predict results and ipso-facto, the constructs, somehow, over time, are taken as gospel and real entities.
Of course, thinking folks who are looking into this stuff realize the stuff is a trick to aid in modeling the math.
Richard Hull
The problem occurs when these "brain assits" are taken as how things are. They are not that way. There are no electric or magnetic field lines, no curvature of space around objects of mass, etc. However, all of these help us develop mathematically predictive structures based on observation of effects and all give ZERO clues as to the core causes of the effects observed. Quite the opposite! They often hobble us in the core level understanding as time goes on. We can use math based on these constructs to successfully predict results and ipso-facto, the constructs, somehow, over time, are taken as gospel and real entities.
Of course, thinking folks who are looking into this stuff realize the stuff is a trick to aid in modeling the math.
Richard Hull
Progress may have been a good thing once, but it just went on too long. - Yogi Berra
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
Fusion is the energy of the future....and it always will be
The more complex the idea put forward by the poor amateur, the more likely it will never see embodiment
-
guest
Re: GRAVITY? Ripples in space or ghost particles.
The rubber sheet gets dragged out because only a handful of folks can understand tensor mechanics.
A book called Hyperspace by Michio Kacu describes all in gory detail. It describes the elementry to the modern theory of today in layman's language. With references in the back.
When I first saw tensors, I was terrified.
After a few years programming matrixes for a living ,tensors don't look so bad now.
Linear Algebra didn't hurt either.
Tensors are detailed pretty well in the Priceton Guide to Advance Physics by Trimble.
But I'm a math geek, 2+2=6 ( 2 boys plus two girls equals six people in year 1: year 2.. 8 people ect.) by symbolic math.
Larry Leins
Physics Teacher
A book called Hyperspace by Michio Kacu describes all in gory detail. It describes the elementry to the modern theory of today in layman's language. With references in the back.
When I first saw tensors, I was terrified.
After a few years programming matrixes for a living ,tensors don't look so bad now.
Linear Algebra didn't hurt either.
Tensors are detailed pretty well in the Priceton Guide to Advance Physics by Trimble.
But I'm a math geek, 2+2=6 ( 2 boys plus two girls equals six people in year 1: year 2.. 8 people ect.) by symbolic math.
Larry Leins
Physics Teacher
-
guest
Re: GRAVITY? Ripples in space or ghost particles.
A new wrinkle has emerged from the puzzle palace at
UC at Berkley. They claim to use superconductors to change electromagnetic energy into electrogravadic energy. I could'nt follow it all due to a yuppie at the college book store cussing his rejected visa card.
It is in the June 2002 Scientific American page 19.
I had about 2 minutes with it . Could'nt tell if it made sense but if true it should be easy to test.
Larry Leins
Physics Teacher
UC at Berkley. They claim to use superconductors to change electromagnetic energy into electrogravadic energy. I could'nt follow it all due to a yuppie at the college book store cussing his rejected visa card.
It is in the June 2002 Scientific American page 19.
I had about 2 minutes with it . Could'nt tell if it made sense but if true it should be easy to test.
Larry Leins
Physics Teacher