Artificial Gravity now a possibity?

[TheSilentOne]

Link

It would seem that a group of ESA funded scientists have found a way to generate "large" amounts of artificial gravity. Note that "large" is a bit of a misnomer here-they only generated a gravitational field of about one ten-thousandth of earth's gravity, but this is only the first experimental setup.

According to General Relativity, a spinning superconductor will generate a small-very small- gravitational field. Because of this, when the effect was measured, it wasn't surprising that it was there. It was, however, surprising that it was measurable. The generated effect is on the order of 10^20 (100,000,000,000,000,000,000) times greater than it should have been!

What will become of this new technology? Do you think artificial gravity will ever be feasable, even(or especially) with room-temp superconductors(and the way that superconductors with higher critical temps have been popping up lately, that development seems almost certain)?

[omega the end]

Well it could be used for a multitude of things after it has been developed more and on a larger scale.

One thing it could do is pull earth away from the sun as it will supossedly blow up.

[Ramrod]

The sun will actually expand before it blows up. It'll expand far enough to eat Earth up. If I remember correctly, this will happen in an estimated 3 billion years.

More than enough time to either die out or find a new home. I'm betting on the former.

[Stripe7]

3 Billion years? Won't take us that long to kill ourselves off. However that is a hard line after which everything that we are or were will be gone from the universe except for a few probes floating out in space.

[SquidDNA]

Initially, the researchers were reluctant to believe their own results.

Yes, yes, Science isn't all.. you know.. SCIENCE!

[Starfisher]

EXPERIMENTAL UNCERTAINTY!

Not as inspiring :/

[NovaBurn]

Very cool indeed. First ideas of an FTL drive, now the possibilty of artificial gravity.

SCIENCE

[Ammon Ra]

We ran more than 250 experiments, improved the facility over 3 years and discussed the validity of the results for 8 months before making this announcement. Now we are confident about the measurement," says Tajmar...

Sounds very interesting. This wouldn't allow vertical "artificial gravity" ala startrek, but would alow objects to exert gravitational fields larger than their mass -reletivistic or not- allows.

[Tiresias]

I was actually always sceptical artificial gravity was even possibly, it always seemed lazy in scifi...

Now of course B5 is inaccurate as Earthships probably would have gravity without spinning :P

[TheSilentOne]

Well, ST:TOS didn't think we'd have flip phones yet... You just never know what's coming down the pipe, really.

Ironically, some 60's futurists probably thought we would have artificial gravity by now...

[cfoley]

More than enough time to either die out or find a new home. I'm betting on the former.

I'll bet on the latter. If we die out first then you won't be able to collect your winnings.

[Wargrim]

I think it was a russian scientist who has been claiming to have found that effect when experimenting with rotating superconductors some years ago, but nobody took him serious back then because he did not have all the expensive technical apparature and time to measure and veryfy it 250 times at a top laboratory, like the esa did now. But i guess now people should start to take it serious. I wonder about 2 things: will the man that discovered it some years ago ever get the credit, when the esa guys are the first that could fund extensive testing? And how much impact has the speed the superconductor rotates with, could a high enough rotation actually produce noticable lift?

Edited for typos.

[Ammon Ra]

It's not "antigravity". and that's a Y.

[Wargrim]

? Is that an answer to my post?

I have read the text, it says it is

the gravitational equivalent of a magnetic field

and every field has a direction ( a local direction in the case of a magnetic field ) that is determined by the thing that creates the field. In case of a magnetic field that means if you send the electric current that creates the magnetic field into the opposite direction, the north and south pole of the magnetic field will swap around. So rotating the superconductor the other way around will lead to the gravitational field changing its orientation, too. There is no difference between gravity and "anti - gravity", it only means the force is pulling in the other direction.

What do you mean by that`s a Y?

[Bonnet]

No, time is a vector.

[Inert]

Wargrim, he meant that you spelled the word "jears" wrong. It's years.

[Paladin]

Gravity has no polarity. Two gravitational fields never repel, they only attract.

[cfoley]

But if you put the spinning superconductors in the ceiling they will lift you off the floor and therefore provide the same effect as anti gravity. This assumes that we can get them to generate a force that strong in the first place.

[SquidDNA]

Podkletnov's experiments were in "gravity shielding." Nobody has been able to reproduce his findings.

[Inert]

Going out on a little thought here, I think the counter to gravity is not anti-gravity, but gravity with an opposing direction. Given an acceleration of A m/s² acting on an object and the same acceleration (yet in the opposite direction) with -A m/s², they would neatly cancel each other out.

This would not to say there aren't any forces acting on the object, just no net force.

[Feil]

Interresting... very interesting. *Waits anxiously for independant confirmation/peer review.* Assuming an insanely powerful reactor and a superconductor that won't fly apart at superhigh speeds, one could potentially use something like this to cheat the acceleration limit put on a manned spaceship by the squishy guy inside. Not any time in the near future, of course... but eh. Interesting all the same.

[Paladin]

There can't be gravity "running in the opposite direction". We talk about gravitational "fields" as a convenience, but it's really just a dimple in spacetime... Therefore gravity will always "pull" towards the object that is the source of the "field". No escaping it. You can make the damn conductor spin in the other direction, it won't have the slightest effect.

And while you can put the generator on the ceiling and have it "pull" you "up", you're actually going "down" relative to the generator... And the generator itself is subject to the gravitational "field" it's in... which is why you have to nail it to the roof, otherwise it would just fall to the ground.

It's not going to help you fly. End of story.

[ceejayoz]

REVERSE THE POLARITY!

[Progenitor]

if gravity's a dimple in spacetime, then to "oppose" gravity we would need to create a "lump" or "hill" in spacetime, which would enable the moving away from the source of gravitational pull.

[Inert]

No no.. I mean to oppose a gravitational field you must have another gravitational field [generator?] applying the same amount of force as the first one on the opposite side of the first one.

Eh... too complicated to explain. @_@

[Alliance]

yeah, so why not just use spinning stations to generate gravity? (if that actually works)

[Tails]

if gravity's a dimple in spacetime, then to "oppose" gravity we would need to create a "lump" or "hill" in spacetime, which would enable the moving away from the source of gravitational pull.

All matter bends the space around it to create a gravitational field. Therefore, to create a "gravitational hill", we would need to have an object with negative mass, which is impossible. (After all, can you put an object on your mattress that will make the sheets float instead of sink?) As Paladin already stated, gravity is always attractive, and never repulsive.

[Moe]

One thing it could do is pull earth away from the sun as it will supossedly blow up.

The physicist in me just died. Do you like, think about suggestions before you make them?

1) Earth = HEAVY.
2) Earth = moving around the sun fairly fast
3) 1)+2) = MOMENTUM. LOTS of it.
4) Sun = REALLY REALLY MASSIVE -> exerts a lot of force on earth
5) Yes the sun will go nova in a few billion years.
6) Even if you could "pull the earth away" regardless of 1)-4), where are you going to pull it to? More importantly, no sun = no light, no heat, no fracking energy. Plants and animals die. Humans have nothing to eat, freeze, die.
7) Summary: Not a good idea.

[Vemarkis]

Rather than moving Earth i would move its inhabitants... Much easier.

[Progenitor]

gravity is always attractive, and never repulsive.

yes, that is because mass is always positive and thus causes dimples in spacetime.

so, negative mass is needed (but which is obviously impossible in today's physics). therefore i'm just stating what "antigravity" might be needing.

and subject being discussed in this thread is about nullifying the effects of gravity, and well..i don't see any antigravity means from nullifying gravity.

unless of course the nullifying effect makes the gravitational pull on the object get so small it turns negative. but that's just wishful thinking.

[Ammon Ra]

Progenitor. What they created is not "Antigravity" or "nullifying" gravity. All they've done is shown that you can create a "gravitational field" by spinning a superconductor. Think of it like electrons. Mass = electrons, Gravity =magnetic field. Spinning the electrons creates a magnetic field, yes? I.e. a coil.

This experiment is showing the same principle for mass-gravity using a spinning mass to generate a gravitational field.

"antigravity" is a scienfictional scapegoat, and is not possible with current physics, be it string theory, quantum or conventional physics.

Anti-matter is also not the answer, as it still has positive mass. However, some theories do create wierd particles with negative mass that repulse normal matter. Dark matter/energy iirc. They don't really exist though, just in the theories of some scientists.

[FluxX]

As far as I can tell, most of the normal ideas for uses are done in much easier ways. IE use magnets for moving things, or a airplane for flying...
Ammon, I guess thats correct. There is no way know to escape space time, so you cannot excape gravity. I won't mention gravitons, and thats just silly.

[boolybooly]

Well it looks like a bonafide article, personally I will wait and see if the results can be reproduced by someone other than "Head of Business - Field Space Propulsion" before inventing new machines.

But it is credible that we dont have the right model of gravity given the unexpected velocity distribution in galaxies.

If it is possible to explore gravity at these energy levels this may be the start of a new body of theory. I wonder if dark matter will survive it ?

Spinning superconductors sounds a lot like that Heim-Droscher FTL ( ever helpful PITA lockbot strikes again ) though in that case a very high magnetic field is required whereas in this experiment the field is weak and created by rotation. The closest this work gets to FTL or "antigravity" is that this experiment could start the process of deciding whether there is any mileage in Heim-Droscher.

[Benjamin]

So they might think they are on the path to artifical gravity. Damn...isn't that the only reason why people want to go in space? Those damn scientists agin, the suck the fun out of everything.

[Paladin]

B.B.'s going to be the guy who keeps on deliberately shorting out the fuse on the gravity generator on the colony ship

[Ammon Ra]

I hope you'll like your new bone structure in microgravity b.b., as your body will start to eat your bones, rendering you as good as useless in outserspace. ;--]

[Inst]

How much energy was required to create artificial gravity?

[The5thElephant]

Ammon, I think your bones would weaken but not to the point of uselessness. You would also grow much taller and have longer limbs and possibly larger genitalia (really I mean it some people predict that happening (Kim Stanley Robinson)).

[TheSilentOne]

Inst, all they did was accelerate a chilled superconducting ring, which, from the size of the apparatus, shouldn't weigh much. It takes energy to spin the thing up, but honestly, I don't think it would be that much. It being a superconductor, you might even be able to use electromagnets to spin it up really fast, instead of an electric motor. mind you, it was only for one ten-thousandth of a g, but seriously, how much energy could it have taken?(if I knew the mass and inner and outer radii, I could probably answer that, too)

[oneredpanther]

You're all overly disappointed considering what's actually happend here; complaining that it's 'not really anti-gravity' when in actual fact something MORE important than anti-gravity has been verified - the fact that we're discovering processes through which to isolate gravity from mass.

[Fiirks]

Panther makes a good point. Isolating gravity from mass is one of the biggest questions posing scientists in this century. Currently the standard model doesnt account for gravity/mass at all! I used to play a game with my science teacher where I would ask him un-answerable questions, one of my favorites was:

Me: Mr. Irzinski, why do objects have mass?"
Aggravated teacher: "Go to the principal's office and ask him!"

[Inert]

This is rather interesting, actually. I've re-read the article, and coupled with Panther's statement, gravity does not require a large amount of mass to generate a large gravitational field. Acceleration, evidently, is a real determining factor in producing gravity.

[Derivative]

Sounds similar to something else I read a while ago. It was one of those fringe sciences that no one believes. In fact, let me quote it:

Then something really spectacular happened. As the generator
continued to increase in potential, it lifted off the ground and broke
free of its mountings and the engine. It floated in the air, all the time
spinning faster and faster. The air around it glowed pink with ionisation
and nearby radio receivers were switched on spontaneously due to
electro-magnetic induction. Then the apparatus accelerated off
into space and was never seen again.

if you feel like reading it, look here

[Da_Humie]

Somehow Derivative, that just sounds like a load of bull. I read the article in its entirety, and it all sounds like horse hockey from a conspiracy theorist gone nuts on an acid trip.

Not saying you're a whack-job or anything like that, but that article sounds full of it.

[Derivative]

I agree with you. Thus the words: "It was one of those fringe sciences that no one believes" in my other post. I found it a while ago after I went on a tangent from various Tesla pages.
I was just saying that it sounded like the news this thread is about.

[Mac_Bug]

Fiirkan your question about mass makes no sense

[BmB]

Hmm... this pulls strings in my memory, I once discovered the (at least the theoretical, no hard evidence) secret to gravity. Of course I had forgotten it 5 minutes after. But it seems it was something that would fit with this.

Or... I dreamt.

[Kheturus]

I once discovered the (at least the theoretical, no hard evidence) secret to gravity.

This guy can't be serious...

[BmB]

I am, I lay in my bed and it suddenly dawned upon me. It was so simple.

And now I forgot what it was.

[Unk]

Derivative - I call bullshit on that.

BmB - A Quantum Theory of gravity just wandered into your head? I find it unlikely but am interested nonetheless. Can you remember anything of this physics breakthrough?

EDIT - Am I allowed to Omnislash that link that Derivative gave? Since its not a user's own post will it be alright?