PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2020-07-03, 23:47:09
News: Registration with the OUR forum is now by invitation only.

Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Gravity-Like Accelerating Fields, Propulsion  (Read 525 times)

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3209
tExB=qr
I spent a lot of time reviewing work related to space propulsion that is publicly available, and realized we are not getting off this rock until we have a better understanding of gravity and how it works.

Stating that gravity is an accelerating force inherent to matter, or that it is an effect of curved space doesn't explain how this force is created by matter or how space curves. 

Every source of information on advanced or breakthrough propulsion repeats the same sources, the same concepts, the same problems, and the same failures.  Some of them mention the "Horizon Mission Methodology", but without new theories and concepts, they arrive at the same conclusions.  After years, nothing is accomplished.

So many expensive, complicated experiments with superconductors, more powerful colliders, searching the skies with more powerful telescopes, and the mystery of gravity still persists.

What if "gravity" is much simpler than we think it is?
   

Group: Room3327 Private Group
Hero Member
*

Posts: 568
Believing in something false doesn't make it true.
Hi Grumpy,

I have had my own theory about gravity for many years.  I have also seen others propose the same idea so I guess I am not the only person that thinks differently.  I believe that gravity pushes not pulls.  I believe gravity is a force that is present in the space between objects and when a large body blocks that force the resulting force pushes us towards the large body.  I also believe that gravity may be the same medium that allows light and other electromagnetic radiation to travel through "empty" space.  Just thought I would share my hare-brained ideas.

Carroll


---------------------------
Just because it is on YouTube does not make it real.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1378
I spent a lot of time reviewing work related to space propulsion that is publicly available, and realized we are not getting off this rock until we have a better understanding of gravity and how it works.

Stating that gravity is an accelerating force inherent to matter, or that it is an effect of curved space doesn't explain how this force is created by matter or how space curves. 

Every source of information on advanced or breakthrough propulsion repeats the same sources, the same concepts, the same problems, and the same failures.  Some of them mention the "Horizon Mission Methodology", but without new theories and concepts, they arrive at the same conclusions.  After years, nothing is accomplished.

So many expensive, complicated experiments with superconductors, more powerful colliders, searching the skies with more powerful telescopes, and the mystery of gravity still persists.

What if "gravity" is much simpler than we think it is?

Well I have my own views on this based on my studies of gyroscopes (I corresponded with Prof Laithewaite) and my strong belief that inertia is not an internal property of a body, but is an external force.  That means space contains an enormous density of particles whizzing through from all directions at velocity c.  These have zero rest mass, but they do have momentum and energy (neutrinos are just such particles).  Mass particles have a collision cross section whereby they continually absorb some of these space particles, and being stable they must also emit space particles at the same rate.  In so-called "flat space" space particles arrive in equal numbers from all directions, and are emitted equally in all directions, hence there is no overall average force on the body.  But the impulsive force associated with each absorption or emission caused by momentum exchange could explain the Heisenberg uncertainty.  It only requires the mass property to (a) emit space particles in the direction their were travelling on impact and (b) have a time delay between impact absorption and emission to then have an inertial property whereby acceleration creates an imbalance between average absorption impulses and emission impulses.  Thus inertia is an external force coming from those space particles.  It is then a simple matter to extend this idea to electromagnetic effects where the space particles have spin (as neutrinos do) and the matter particle exhibiting charge emits its absorbed neutrinos in a direction determined by the spin vector of the neutrino.  Note that depending on the velocity vector of the distant emitting source of the received space particle, and the velocity vector of the receiving matter particle, the perceived spin vector of the arriving neutrino can be parallel to the arrival direction or be at an angle to it.  This ties electric ant magnetic forces together, both have the same origin with the latter being of order v/c times the former.  Finally gravitation can be explained as a sort of shielding effect, but not quite the usual shielding but the shielding mass emits neutrinos with their spin vectors aligned with the emission direction, whereas the background neutrinos arrive with some average transverse spin vector.  This creates the attractive force between mass particles.  But it all comes down to momentum from absorbed and emitted neutrinos.
Smudge
   

Group: Mad Scientist
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 481
My view on magnetic propulsion is irrelevant of gravity, as to what gravity is.  From what I understand is that a magnet is only it ability to distort the fields that are all around us already, as I said earlier in another thread. A magnet doesnt have the ability to provide this propulsion, magnet or electromagnet, because it just polarizes and condenses the fields around it. So there is not actual push/pull force as we are seeking.

A magnetic propulsion device needs to be able to actually pull in these fields and actually push them out the other end. Similarly, such a device should be able to generate electricity by physically moving it through these already existing fields. Possibly, as to produce propulsion I believe we would need to supply electrical energy to the device in order to create motive force. So this gathering of fields in the front of the device and pushing them out the back needs to, similarly to a fan and air, decompress the density of the fields in the front and pressurize them in the rear. Where a magnet/electromagnet just condenses these fields, not causing a pressure, or decompression at either end, thus providing no motive force.

So we would need to use that compressing action of say an electromagnets, and then a way to decompress at the other end. Somehow. ;)

Mags

   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3209
tExB=qr
If we use the "Horizon Mission Methodology" approach, summarized here:

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.860.6656&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Horizon  Mission  Methodology  (HMM)
HMM  is  a  relatively  new procedure  in  which  new  technological approaches  areexplored through  a  technique  that  forces  out-of-the-box  thinking.  The  participants  assume that  they  are  living  in  some  future  time during  which  some  breakthrough  technology  is being used. They are then asked  to project backwards  toward  the present  and  speculate  on the genesis  of  this  technology.  This  approach  offers the possibility  of  minimizing con-formist  thinking  and   promotes  the  development  of  imaginative  concepts. The  NationalAeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has used this approach in seeking new  concepts for  propulsion  for  space travel. Air Force-sponsored and other studies have also incorporated a broad HMM concept.

Taking into account the human limitation mentioned here:
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19930047019

(part of the abstract of this paper)
The Horizon Mission (HM) methodology was developed to provide a means of identifying and evaluating highly innovative, breakthrough technology concepts (BTCs) and for assessing their potential impact on advanced space missions. The methodology is based on identifying new capabilities needed by hypothetical 'horizon' space missions having performance requirements that cannot be met even by extrapolating known space technologies. Normal human evaluation of new ideas such as BTCs appears to be governed (and limited) by 'inner models of reality' defined as paradigms. Thus, new ideas are evaluated by old models. [/i][/b]


  • We assume we can create and utilize an accelerating force field, like gravity, to propel our craft through space.
  • Lacking much else to go on, we can factor in the properties of unconventional craft that Paul Hill mentions i his book.  I.E. Accelertaing force field, the field rotates, and there is indication of a 5kHz pulse rate.
  • The breakthrough(s) may not come from established experts, but may be found by experimenters, or anyone that noticed some connection between things that others overlooked.
  • Less power is required than currently proposed systems, like the Alcubierre Drive.
  • The force field effect is undeniable, orders of magnitude larger than current experiments and speculations.
  • Gravity is inherently produced by matter, as indicated by a improved atomic model.
  • A gravity-like accelerating force can be produced and controlled electromagnetically, as indicated by a theory that unifies all fields of force.
  • The power supply for the accelerating field is either highly efficient, or requires no fuel, and probably works on similar principles as the field drive.

 
That's a lot of speculation, but that is what is required.
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3209
tExB=qr
Lacking much else to go on, we can factor in the properties of unconventional craft that Paul Hill mentions i his book.  I.E. Accelertaing force field, the field rotates, and there is indication of a 5kHz pulse rate.

Does this seem very coincidental to anyone else?

That's right! The Steven Mark TPU has these same features (accelerating field oriented circumferentially, 5kHz, and rotating field).

« Last Edit: 2020-02-26, 22:32:20 by Grumpy »
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 7
Well I have my own views on this based on my studies of gyroscopes (I corresponded with Prof Laithewaite) and my strong belief that inertia is not an internal property of a body, but is an external force.  That means space contains an enormous density of particles whizzing through from all directions at velocity c.  These have zero rest mass, but they do have momentum and energy (neutrinos are just such particles).  Mass particles have a collision cross section whereby they continually absorb some of these space particles, and being stable they must also emit space particles at the same rate.  In so-called "flat space" space particles arrive in equal numbers from all directions, and are emitted equally in all directions, hence there is no overall average force on the body.  But the impulsive force associated with each absorption or emission caused by momentum exchange could explain the Heisenberg uncertainty.  It only requires the mass property to (a) emit space particles in the direction their were travelling on impact and (b) have a time delay between impact absorption and emission to then have an inertial property whereby acceleration creates an imbalance between average absorption impulses and emission impulses.  Thus inertia is an external force coming from those space particles.  It is then a simple matter to extend this idea to electromagnetic effects where the space particles have spin (as neutrinos do) and the matter particle exhibiting charge emits its absorbed neutrinos in a direction determined by the spin vector of the neutrino.  Note that depending on the velocity vector of the distant emitting source of the received space particle, and the velocity vector of the receiving matter particle, the perceived spin vector of the arriving neutrino can be parallel to the arrival direction or be at an angle to it.  This ties electric ant magnetic forces together, both have the same origin with the latter being of order v/c times the former.  Finally gravitation can be explained as a sort of shielding effect, but not quite the usual shielding but the shielding mass emits neutrinos with their spin vectors aligned with the emission direction, whereas the background neutrinos arrive with some average transverse spin vector.  This creates the attractive force between mass particles.  But it all comes down to momentum from absorbed and emitted neutrinos.
Smudge

Hello Smudge and all.

I think this deserves attention.

https://physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.com/2018/

It explains inertia, it eliminates the need for dark matter, it explains the Emdrive, it has been published and peer reviewed, apparently independent experiments in German and Spanish Universities have shown positive results, and it is OU.

Regards
Cortazar
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3209
tExB=qr
the latest test of the EM Drive is that it doesn't seem to work:

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2169809-impossible-em-drive-doesnt-seem-to-work-after-all/
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3209
tExB=qr
In the attached paper by Marc Millis (of the Tau Zero Foundation, and NASA Breakthrough Propulsion Physics) talks about the many issues with a menas of propulsion that reacts against "space".  He focuses on the rational behind these objections.


   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3209
tExB=qr
The objections that Millis discusses are:
1.   Violation of conservation of momentum (no reaction mass)
2.   there is nothing in the vacuum of space to push against
3.   No “Grand Unification Theories” linking gravity to other fundamental forces enabling control of gravity, such as electrodynamics

It's my understanding that an accelerating force field would not need a reaction mass.

Paul Hill somehow concluded that UFO's focus their accelerating force field when not near the earth.  Whether or not they are able to push on "space" is still undetermined, but they sure move fast.

Willie Johnson's GFT claims to be a UFT, there are a couple others floating around but I'm not familair with them.
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3209
tExB=qr
Millis makes the following interesting comments regarding conservation of momentum and reacting against "space":

Continuing with these speculative perspectives, forces could be induced relative to inertial frames if it were possible for a vehicle to alter its gravitational field distribution or its connectivity to its own inertial frame.
By redistributing its own gravitational field, it could, in effect, create a local asymmetric acceleration field. The reaction forces would be imparted to the "stiff" inertial frame and subsequently to their source matter (figure 3).
This is similar to the special case in the concept of negative mass propulsion where there is more normal mass than negative mass. In this case the non-zero momentum of the vehicle would be balanced by the equal and opposite momentum of the inertial space and its associated matter.


Maybe this is why UFO's focus their accelrating force field, creating a local assymetrical acceleration field.

So, we have enough to look past the objections for now.
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3209
tExB=qr
Millis goes on to list 4 possible avenues for Inducing Acceleration Effects via Intermediary Phenomena:

In addition to the perspective of inducing forces from the simple motion of matter, there is the perspective of using some intermediary phenomena to induce effects.
This means finding some controllable phenomena that is related with the phenomena of gravity, and using this control phenomena to indirectly induce gravitational effects.
An example of this intermediary principle is the way that microwaves (electrodynamics) are used to induce molecular vibrations (heat). With respect to space coupling propulsion, the prime intermediary phenomena is electrodynamics. Various approaches to correlate gravity to other phenomena are briefly reviewed below and include:
(1) General Relativity's connection between inertial frames and gravity as referenced by electrodynamics
(2) Gravity as an index of refraction for electrodynamics
(3) Gravity as a Zero Point Energy effect
(4) The hypercharge force.

Millis is not familar with the GFT and it's approach is more direct and fairly easy to experiment with.

In a nut shell, the GFT states that gravity is result of the precession of an axially rotating magnetic field, and goes on to prove this mathematically.
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3209
tExB=qr
So, IF gravity is result of the precession of an axially rotating magnetic field, how can we prove this?

Well, it can be done mechanically, or electrically.  Eectrically is as complex as the AVEC (spherics) TPU, so let's look at mechanical solutions.

You could just make a top out of a magnet and spin it, but any effect, if there even is one, is likely so small that it is not detectable. 
There is a law in the GFT that gives the force of the gravity-like field and it is based on the rotational speed, the strength of the magne, and strength of the force producing the precession.
In the case of a spinning top, the rotational speed is slow, the magnet is small, and the force producing he precession is gravity (also kinda weak).   
We can't replace the force of gravity with another magnetic field because the top is free to flip round and align with the other field.
Might get something with a gram scale, and a pull-string top with a magnet added.

We could drive a magnet on a shaft, but it needs to be able to precess, so we'll need a spherical bearing.  To drive hrough the spherical bearing requires modifiying it to pin the inner race to the outer race,   and a slot inside the inner race.  Then the driveshaft has to slide apart to allow it to rise up, else we have the weigh the whole thing and the motor makes that a problem.  We can add a magnetic feld via a coil outside for the force to replace gravity.  This will work as  proof of concept.

Doing it electrically opens the door for many possibilities, and for focusing of the field.

   

Group: Mad Scientist
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 481
So, IF gravity is result of the precession of an axially rotating magnetic field, how can we prove this?

Well, it can be done mechanically, or electrically.  Eectrically is as complex as the AVEC (spherics) TPU, so let's look at mechanical solutions.

You could just make a top out of a magnet and spin it, but any effect, if there even is one, is likely so small that it is not detectable. 
There is a law in the GFT that gives the force of the gravity-like field and it is based on the rotational speed, the strength of the magne, and strength of the force producing the precession.
In the case of a spinning top, the rotational speed is slow, the magnet is small, and the force producing he precession is gravity (also kinda weak).   
We can't replace the force of gravity with another magnetic field because the top is free to flip round and align with the other field.
Might get something with a gram scale, and a pull-string top with a magnet added.

We could drive a magnet on a shaft, but it needs to be able to precess, so we'll need a spherical bearing.  To drive hrough the spherical bearing requires modifiying it to pin the inner race to the outer race,   and a slot inside the inner race.  Then the driveshaft has to slide apart to allow it to rise up, else we have the weigh the whole thing and the motor makes that a problem.  We can add a magnetic feld via a coil outside for the force to replace gravity.  This will work as  proof of concept.

Doing it electrically opens the door for many possibilities, and for focusing of the field.

Could use ceramic bearings
Expensive but worth it for tests like these. While working on the whipmags back in the days, the bearings we used for the stators caused some issues with drag, but ceramics were very expensive then.

But a sphere mag in a concave mirror and a bit of oil is very drag free. Like the lidmotors way back

Mags
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3209
tExB=qr
The bearing has to be modified so it can transmit the rotation of the shaft to the magnet, but also allow the magnet to pivot so it can precess.

Like I mentioned, doing this mechanically I difficult and frought with problems.

   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3209
tExB=qr
I found a nice metal top with a pull string and ordered it.  Once I have it,  I'll measure the hub and get a magnet that will fit to test it on my gram scale.  I don;t expect to see anything but it's easy enough to try an experiment.

The rotating and pulsed features of the accelerating field, as deduced by Paul Hill regarding UFO propulsion, coincides somewhat with commment made by Stephan Marinov.  See attached.
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3209
tExB=qr
One of the most interesting ideas in the "magvid" pdf is Marinov's explanation of FTL communication. 

Sounds like he's saying to alter the permittivity and permeability of space, to reduce these constants, increasing the speed of light.

He also says that this is one of the effects produced by the magvid device.
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3372
Grumpy
Here a very smart fellow is open sourcing a build he is planning [seems a big build]

http://www.energeticforum.com/forum/energetic-forum-discussion/renewable-energy/14472-an-inquiry-into-magvid#post497092
   
Pages: [1]
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2020-07-03, 23:47:09