Welcome
Username or Email:

Password:


Missing Code




[ ]
[ ]
Online
  • Guests: 91
  • Members: 0
  • Newest Member: omjtest
  • Most ever online: 396
    Guests: 396, Members: 0 on 12 Jan : 12:51
Members Birthdays:
All today's birthdays', congrats!
dan (37)
rchydro (64)
CapRack (30)


Next birthdays
11/07 Dave Marshall (40)
11/07 Worms (46)
11/08 Bert (77)
Contact
If you need assistance, please send an email to forum at 4hv dot org. To ensure your email is not marked as spam, please include the phrase "4hv help" in the subject line. You can also find assistance via IRC, at irc.shadowworld.net, room #hvcomm.
Support 4hv.org!
Donate:
4hv.org is hosted on a dedicated server. Unfortunately, this server costs and we rely on the help of site members to keep 4hv.org running. Please consider donating. We will place your name on the thanks list and you'll be helping to keep 4hv.org alive and free for everyone. Members whose names appear in red bold have donated recently. Green bold denotes those who have recently donated to keep the server carbon neutral.


Special Thanks To:
  • Aaron Holmes
  • Aaron Wheeler
  • Adam Horden
  • Alan Scrimgeour
  • Andre
  • Andrew Haynes
  • Anonymous000
  • asabase
  • Austin Weil
  • barney
  • Barry
  • Bert Hickman
  • Bill Kukowski
  • Blitzorn
  • Brandon Paradelas
  • Bruce Bowling
  • BubeeMike
  • Byong Park
  • Cesiumsponge
  • Chris F.
  • Chris Hooper
  • Corey Worthington
  • Derek Woodroffe
  • Dalus
  • Dan Strother
  • Daniel Davis
  • Daniel Uhrenholt
  • datasheetarchive
  • Dave Billington
  • Dave Marshall
  • David F.
  • Dennis Rogers
  • drelectrix
  • Dr. John Gudenas
  • Dr. Spark
  • E.TexasTesla
  • eastvoltresearch
  • Eirik Taylor
  • Erik Dyakov
  • Erlend^SE
  • Finn Hammer
  • Firebug24k
  • GalliumMan
  • Gary Peterson
  • George Slade
  • GhostNull
  • Gordon Mcknight
  • Graham Armitage
  • Grant
  • GreySoul
  • Henry H
  • IamSmooth
  • In memory of Leo Powning
  • Jacob Cash
  • James Howells
  • James Pawson
  • Jeff Greenfield
  • Jeff Thomas
  • Jesse Frost
  • Jim Mitchell
  • jlr134
  • Joe Mastroianni
  • John Forcina
  • John Oberg
  • John Willcutt
  • Jon Newcomb
  • klugesmith
  • Leslie Wright
  • Lutz Hoffman
  • Mads Barnkob
  • Martin King
  • Mats Karlsson
  • Matt Gibson
  • Matthew Guidry
  • mbd
  • Michael D'Angelo
  • Mikkel
  • mileswaldron
  • mister_rf
  • Neil Foster
  • Nick de Smith
  • Nick Soroka
  • nicklenorp
  • Nik
  • Norman Stanley
  • Patrick Coleman
  • Paul Brodie
  • Paul Jordan
  • Paul Montgomery
  • Ped
  • Peter Krogen
  • Peter Terren
  • PhilGood
  • Richard Feldman
  • Robert Bush
  • Royce Bailey
  • Scott Fusare
  • Scott Newman
  • smiffy
  • Stella
  • Steven Busic
  • Steve Conner
  • Steve Jones
  • Steve Ward
  • Sulaiman
  • Thomas Coyle
  • Thomas A. Wallace
  • Thomas W
  • Timo
  • Torch
  • Ulf Jonsson
  • vasil
  • Vaxian
  • vladi mazzilli
  • wastehl
  • Weston
  • William Kim
  • William N.
  • William Stehl
  • Wesley Venis
The aforementioned have contributed financially to the continuing triumph of 4hv.org. They are deserving of my most heartfelt thanks.
Forums
4hv.org :: Forums :: General Science and Electronics
« Previous topic | Next topic »   

CERN antigravity experiment

1 2 3 
Move Thread LAN_403
Conundrum
Sat Dec 07 2013, 10:40AM Print
Conundrum Registered Member #96 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 05:37PM
Location: CI, Earth
Posts: 4061
Link2

Hmm. So there may be hope for one of my theories after all.
I suggested way back in 2009 that a possible fix for the non existent dark matter was dipolar gravity, ie on cosmological scales antimatter exerted a large scale force causing the Universe to expand exponentially.

At small scales it could exhibit detectable antigravity effects that would be possible to detect, in fact one possible theory I suggested in 2009 that one explanation for Dr. Potklentkov's experimental results was short lived trapping of positron anti-Cooper pairs within the superconducting lattice of the HTSC leading to a detectable drop in gravity above the experiment.
In this case the reason no-one else saw the same results was the differences in fabrication technique of the disks, and as such the effect didn't materialise although one group did report other effects.
EDIT: Link2

Later experiments such as Dr. Martin Tajmar's gravitomagnetic London moment experiment confirmed something strange happens inside a superconducting disk spinning at high speed which violates CoE and suggests new physics.

EDIT: No current replication BUT the experiment is very complex and the effect Prof. Tajmar was seeing could have come from several sources including the superfluid helium 3 used.

Its possible, of course we will have to wait and see.

-A
Back to top
BigBad
Sat Dec 07 2013, 01:42PM
BigBad Registered Member #2529 Joined: Thu Dec 10 2009, 02:43AM
Location:
Posts: 600
My understanding is that the supercondutor-based gravitomagnetic London moment experiment was not confirmed by later experiments.
Back to top
Ash Small
Sat Dec 07 2013, 02:07PM
Ash Small Registered Member #3414 Joined: Sun Nov 14 2010, 05:05PM
Location: UK
Posts: 4245
Conundrum wrote ...

I suggested way back in 2009 that a possible fix for the non existent dark matter was dipolar gravity, ie on cosmological scales antimatter exerted a large scale force causing the Universe to expand exponentially.

While I also doubt the existence of 'dark matter', I'm of the opinion that the forces responsible for the expansion of the universe are more to do with the electromagnetic repulsuve forces within plasmas, which are far stronger than gravity.

Most of the matter in the universe is plasma, so there is plenty of it.
Back to top
Uspring
Sat Dec 07 2013, 05:28PM
Uspring Registered Member #3988 Joined: Thu Jul 07 2011, 03:25PM
Location:
Posts: 711
It's dark energy not dark matter, which is thought of causing the expansion of the universe.

If this experiment would show gravitational repulsion, it would deal a devastating blow to general relativity, which only makes sense if the equivalence principle holds.
This states, that inertial and gravitational masses are the same. Antimatter definitely has positive inertial mass. Negative gravitational mass would violate it.

I don't believe the gravitational effects of a few positrons can be measured at all. For a measurable force you need kg's of them. To measure the effect of gravity on antimatter is much easier, although difficult enough.

Back to top
Ash Small
Sat Dec 07 2013, 06:22PM
Ash Small Registered Member #3414 Joined: Sun Nov 14 2010, 05:05PM
Location: UK
Posts: 4245
Uspring wrote ...

It's dark energy not dark matter, which is thought of causing the expansion of the universe.


According to 'Dark Fluid' theory, dark matter and dark energy are one and the same thing Link2

Personally, I don't buy any of it. We know there are repulsive forces in the universe already that may well be capable of driving the expansion. Plasmas are expanding all the time. The 'Solar Winds', etc are features of this phenomena. Why do we need to invent all this 'invisible stuff'?
Back to top
Uspring
Sat Dec 07 2013, 07:02PM
Uspring Registered Member #3988 Joined: Thu Jul 07 2011, 03:25PM
Location:
Posts: 711
In my personal ranking on exoticity dark fluid theory is higher up on the scale than dark matter or energy. DFT just replaces the dark matter puzzle by the puzzle on how or why to modify the laws of gravitation.
But I must confess, that I'm not too literate in cosmology. I don't think repulsive forces work too well in explaining the universe's expansion. It is space itself that expands. How would you push space?

Back to top
Ash Small
Sat Dec 07 2013, 07:44PM
Ash Small Registered Member #3414 Joined: Sun Nov 14 2010, 05:05PM
Location: UK
Posts: 4245
Uspring wrote ...

In my personal ranking on exoticity dark fluid theory is higher up on the scale than dark matter or energy. DFT just replaces the dark matter puzzle by the puzzle on how or why to modify the laws of gravitation.
But I must confess, that I'm not too literate in cosmology. I don't think repulsive forces work too well in explaining the universe's expansion. It is space itself that expands. How would you push space?


Well, my opinion is that if they have to look for extra 'energy', they should try measuring the electromagnetic energy stored in those massive swirling clouds of 'space plasma'. The cosmos is full of electromagnetic energy, why do we need to 'invent' more?
Back to top
Conundrum
Sun Dec 08 2013, 08:36AM
Conundrum Registered Member #96 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 05:37PM
Location: CI, Earth
Posts: 4061
Makes sense, I am not a theoretical cosmologist but from simple calculations unless antimatter has an enormous antigravity effect then the maths simply don't add up.
This is part of the reason why I theorised that the force is inverse to normal gravity ie over large distances it increases exponentially where normal gravity decreases by the same magnitude...
In fact this would possibly also explain some of the observations of anomalous quasars if antimatter/matter gravitational interactions were responsible for the enormous luminosity.
Back to top
Ash Small
Sun Dec 08 2013, 11:58AM
Ash Small Registered Member #3414 Joined: Sun Nov 14 2010, 05:05PM
Location: UK
Posts: 4245
Conundrum wrote ...

Makes sense, I am not a theoretical cosmologist but from simple calculations unless antimatter has an enormous antigravity effect then the maths simply don't add up.
This is part of the reason why I theorised that the force is inverse to normal gravity ie over large distances it increases exponentially where normal gravity decreases by the same magnitude...
In fact this would possibly also explain some of the observations of anomalous quasars if antimatter/matter gravitational interactions were responsible for the enormous luminosity.

I'd suggest that the 'enormous luninosity' is more of an electro-magnetic phenomenon than 'gravitational interactions'. (although matter-antimatter 'annihalation' would presumably result in the release of some light)

Photons are, after all, electromagnetic energy.

We've only just started 'measuring' the potential gradient between us and the sun, and even NASA says that the Earth's poles and the sun's poles 'switch' due to 'some unexplained external mechanism', when we all know, from basic electric motor theory', that this can only happen when subjected to an 'alternating external field'. Why do we need to 'invent' this 'new science'?
Back to top
Uspring
Mon Dec 09 2013, 10:27AM
Uspring Registered Member #3988 Joined: Thu Jul 07 2011, 03:25PM
Location:
Posts: 711
Ash Small wrote:
Well, my opinion is that if they have to look for extra 'energy', they should try measuring the electromagnetic energy stored in those massive swirling clouds of 'space plasma'. The cosmos is full of electromagnetic energy, why do we need to 'invent' more?
You'd need extreme amounts of energy to account for the missing mass needed to e.g. explain the rotational speed of the outer arms of galaxies. Energy is very light (m=E/c^2) and astronomers can't find it in the required amounts.

Back to top
1 2 3 

Moderator(s): Chris Russell, Noelle, Alex, Tesladownunder, Dave Marshall, Dave Billington, Bjørn, Steve Conner, Wolfram, Kizmo, Mads Barnkob

Go to:

Powered by e107 Forum System
 
Legal Information
This site is powered by e107, which is released under the GNU GPL License. All work on this site, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 License. By submitting any information to this site, you agree that anything submitted will be so licensed. Please read our Disclaimer and Policies page for information on your rights and responsibilities regarding this site.