Gravity inducing an antigravity effect

[HydrogenBond]

This observation came to me last week. I thought I would share. It has to do with using gravity to create an anti-gravity effect.

 

Here is the scenario, based on a basic observation. We are in space, at zero gravity. We have a closed beaker of water, into which we place a bead of oil, at the very bottom. The oil bead will just sit there at zero gravity. Next, we add gravity. The bead of oil will move opposite to the direction of the pull of gravity; floats to the top.

 

One may explain this observation using the density differences and/or EM considerations, but the bottom line is, the movement out of the gravity well of GR by the oil, only occurs when we add gravity. Gravity makes use of the EM force and it will not occur unless gravity is active. The higher the gravitational field, the faster the oil moves out of the space-time well.

 

 

 

.

[maddog]

Next, we add gravity. The bead of oil will move opposite to the direction of the pull of gravity; floats to the top.

HB,

 

To what direction did you add a gravitational field. Since in space there is no "up" and

there is no "top". So you are speaking relative to beaker ? So relative to the beaker in

which direction is the force of gravity ? I would challenge you that in that direction would

the bead of oil flow.

 

maddog

[Eclogite]

Regardless of the direction of movement, in what way can you claim this is anti-gravity? If that is anti-gravity then so is any bead of oil placed in any beaker of water anywhere on the planet. In short, your observations are trivial, your conlcusion misplaced.

[Gordon Freeman]

He's kind-of on the right track, I can see what you meant by it OP, and there are in fact effects of anti-gravito forces produced simply because gravity is present. Take for example, if you had fluid flowing through a tube, condensed fluid, that was also magnetic. This is called a super-therma-fluid. Maddog's avatar show's the exact diagram describing this affect. If you accelerate the fluid to a high enough rate, the magnetic field becomes so strong, the magnetic force actually over-powers the gravitational forces. Since magnetism and gravity are so closely related you could say the affect is a direct production of anti-gravito force, but it would still work even if gravity wasn't applied, because electromagnetism would still be used. You still need mass nonetheless, and mass produces gravity, which is what magnetic fields like the one described play off of.

 

So it's true and established that yes, in order to have anti-gravity you must first have gravity itself, however gravity does not cause anti-gravity directly, only offers the option.

[JMJones0424]

Gordon, thanks for your attempt at being diplomatic, but I think it is important to point out a few things.

 

First, wikipedia defines anti-gravity as

In physical cosmology, astronomy and celestial mechanics, anti-gravity is the idea of creating a place or object that is free from the force of gravity. It does not refer to the lack of weight under gravity experienced in free fall or orbit, nor to balancing the force of gravity with some other force, such as electromagnetism or aerodynamic lift.

 

The bold part is important, or else anything that temporarily overcomes gravity could be considered to produce "anti-gravity", and if you use this as your definition, then you lose the intended meaning of the term. Hot-air ballons, planes, pogo-sticks, and a well thrown ball at some point move opposite to the direction of the gravity field, yet none of these are said to be under the influence of anti-gravity. Neither is a drop of oil floating in water, or a boat, or a stick, or anything else that is less dense than water.

 

If one were to follow the thought experiment as described in the original post, and place the beaker of water containing an oil drop into an "anti-gravity field", one should expect no movement in the drop of oil. That oil floats in a fluid of greater density is indicitave of gravitational effects, not anti-gravity.

 

... the movement out of the gravity well of GR by the oil, only occurs when we add gravity.

This much is obvious, yet what you have failed to consider is that the oil also only moves out of the gravity well as long as there is a more dense fluid available to displace it. This is the proof that in fact, there is no anti-gravity at all, just gravity doing what gravity does.

Edited August 6, 2010 by JMJones0424
added final thought

[Gordon Freeman]

Gordon, thanks for your attempt at being diplomatic, but I think it is important to point out a few things.

 

I tried :3

 

You seem to argue that anti-gravito production is impossible altogether though. Without so much iteration, I inquire as to how you preface that there is no such thing as gravity in the negative?

[HydrogenBond]

The bead of oil at the bottom of the beaker will move away from the dominant source of gravity. The oil is being displaced from the denser space-time at the bottom of the beaker, and moving to expanding space-time, because the water is moving toward the source of the gravity. If we were then to remove all the water, we can get work out of the oil since it has gained gravity potential.

 

We don't call this particular effect antigravity, even if the effect occurs when gravity is applied and will increase as gravity increases. The oil will even accelerate away from the source of gravity and will gain gravitational potential.

[Jay-qu]

The oil moves 'up' because the water is more dense than oil.

[Gordon Freeman]

The oil is being displaced from the denser space-time at the bottom of the beaker, and moving to expanding space-time, because the water is moving toward the source of the gravity.

 

Expansion and contraction of space time is not gravity. Nor does it have a set direction, that being 'up' and 'down'. Gravity is a property, not a substance. And water doesn't move towards the source of gravity, it moves towards the source of immediate mass. The water is just attracted more than the oil. The oil still experiences gravity though, just not as much.

[Cold-co]

This observation came to me last week. I thought I would share. It has to do with using gravity to create an anti-gravity effect.

 

 

Here is the scenario, based on a basic observation. We are in space, at zero gravity. We have a closed beaker of water, into which we place a bead of oil, at the very bottom. The oil bead will just sit there at zero gravity. Next, we add gravity. The bead of oil will move opposite to the direction of the pull of gravity; floats to the top.

 

 

One may explain this observation using the density differences and/or EM considerations, but the bottom line is, the movement out of the gravity well of GR by the oil, only occurs when we add gravity. Gravity makes use of the EM force and it will not occur unless gravity is active. The higher the gravitational field, the faster the oil moves out of the space-time well.

 

 

 

 

.

[Cold-co]

Just where in space, as we know it, do you find zero gravity? If you are talking about an orbiting space capsule then gratity is still there but is being countered by an outward acceleration.

[HydrogenBond]

The problem is semantics. Anti-gravity in a theoretical sense, is still an imaginary thing we can't demonstrate in the lab. Because we can't demonstrate it, we can't say what it can and can not do with any hard evidence. Just because I used a real observation and not an imaginary one, does not preclude anything.

 

If we wanted to generate an anti-EM force; create an effect that created EM repulsion within a system that should EM attract, we can use another source of EM to generate an output, which in turn, can be used to create the desired effect. For example, an excited hydrogen atom falls to the ground state. This gives off energy that can excite the ground state of another hydrogen atom. The second atom has an attractive situation, repelling. I was using gravity to create an output effect that can oppose gravity. This is not imaginary, so maybe it doesn't fit the semantics.

[maddog]

... there are in fact effects of anti-gravito forces produced simply because gravity is present. Take for example, if you had fluid flowing through a tube, condensed fluid, that was also magnetic. This is called a super-therma-fluid. Maddog's avatar show's the exact diagram describing this affect. If you accelerate the fluid to a high enough rate, the magnetic field becomes so strong, the magnetic force actually over-powers the gravitational forces. Since magnetism and gravity are so closely related you could say the affect is a direct production of anti-gravito force, but it would still work even if gravity wasn't applied, because electromagnetism would still be used. You still need mass nonetheless, and mass produces gravity, which is what magnetic fields like the one described play off of.

 

So it's true and established that yes, in order to have anti-gravity you must first have gravity itself, however gravity does not cause anti-gravity directly, only offers the option.

What you are describing is an action caused by the force of Magnetism which is a product of the EM field not a Gravitic field. To say this is an "anti-gravity effect" is not only inaccurate, it is misleading. Yes, both field are of similar structure, falling off as 1/r^2. EM forces are much stronger than Gravity and easily overpower at

small mass values.

 

BTW, my avatar is a representation of the Robinson Conjecture which is a graphic representation of a photon in Twistor space (EM field again). For more information

look up via Google "Roger Penrose Twistors". You will find a lot. :)

 

maddog

[fr0stbyte69]

I like this train of thought a few years ago I contemplated a perpetual motion devise that uses this principle. In short using electrolysis to create hydrogen and oxygen. Let the earths own gravity lift these elements indefinatly upwards. Reconstituting those elements into water with a fuel cell. Let the water flow through a series of turbines on the way down. Collect an increase of energy from the system which comes from the earths gravity both pushing and pulling on oposit sides of the system.

[Qfwfq]

In short using electrolysis to create hydrogen and oxygen. Let the earths own gravity lift these elements indefinatly upwards. Reconstituting those elements into water with a fuel cell. Let the water flow through a series of turbines on the way down. Collect an increase of energy from the system which comes from the earths gravity both pushing and pulling on oposit sides of the system.

Have you figured exactly where the extra power would be coming from?