Gravity Propulsion Drive

[sigurdV]

This concept of gravity drive Ive seen somewhere before...
Who was the first to suggest it? A science fiction author?

 

[AlexG]

The common theme to the laws of physics is: support infrastructure for light. That leads to aether medium waves.

Simply pulled this out of your ass.

Making up stuff is the only thing you're good at.

 

[brucep]

I believe your blue statement. How come administrators leave him be then? They have a sense of humour!?

Apparently it's ok to continually disrespect science and those who work in the field. For me it's worthy of pointing out. Along with lying about credentials you don't actually have. I don't think he's funny. Unless laughing at 'dunce stool candidates' is funny.

 

[Mazulu]

I don't want to suppress it. If you could provide clear, justified, reproducible evidence for an aether I would do all I can to help you spread it to as many people as possible. Such a discovery would be huge. But for precisely that reason the level of evidence I or any other physicist would require is similarly huge. Saying "God told me" wouldn't be enough for you to justify bricks fall to the ground, let alone the existence of something which would sweep 100 years of physics into the bin.

If I could kill special relativity tomorrow I would. If I could kill quantum mechanics tomorrow I would. Not because I dislike them (I very much do like them) but because if they are wrong, demonstrably wrong, then people should know. Hacks have this misconceptions physicists need to cling to the mainstream lest they lose their jobs. MORE funding, MORE jobs arise when paradigms are knocked over, so if a hack things physicists are all in it for the research grants then they contradict themselves by thinking physicists wouldn't kill a mainstream theory if they had the chance.

I don't think that GR, SR, or QM are wrong. I think that the experimentation and the math is correct. But I do think that the interpretation of these phenomena and the available paradigms leave a lot to be desired. Nobody is observing time travelers or parallel universe phenomena. But there are thousands of pilots who are observing UFO's, UFO's that occupy the same air space. During the cold war, there were airforce commanders and many soldeirs who were observing UFO's and alien (not manufactured by humans) crafts; and then, the nuclear missile silo is shut down. These are career killing statements. You have to choose between your career advancement, or stand by the truth of what you saw. Like I said, I don't think GR/SR/QM are wrong. I think that the paradigms and the interpretations need some more attention.

I do understand that "God told me" and/or "aliens told me" is not going to attract DARPA funds. I wish I could write up a description of the aether medium the way I conceptualize it. But you're right, I don't have the necessary physics/mathematics skill to do it.

But I stand by what I said. Rapid and repeated frequency shifting, of good quality, with a high $$\frac{\Delta f}{\Delta t}$$ is going to surprise all of you.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

I don't think that GR, SR, or QM are wrong. I think that the experimentation and the math is correct.

Except you've shown you don't know the maths and you're ignorant of what the physics actually involves.

But I do think that the interpretation of these phenomena and the available paradigms leave a lot to be desired.

But you've demonstrated you haven't bothered to find out what the physics actually says. You've repeatedly misrepresented science and scientists. Speaking as someone in the physics community I can categorically state your understanding of what we say and do and think is terrible. As such all you're doing is attacking strawmen of your own construction.

Nobody is observing time travelers or parallel universe phenomena.

Case in point.

But there are thousands of pilots who are observing UFO's, UFO's that occupy the same air space. During the cold war, there were airforce commanders and many soldeirs who were observing UFO's and alien (not manufactured by humans) crafts; and then, the nuclear missile silo is shut down. These are career killing statements. You have to choose between your career advancement, or stand by the truth of what you saw.

Except no tangible evidence has ever been presented. Seeing and even hearing things is an all too common problem humans suffer from. If you're in a stressful situation, haven't slept much, being doing a repetitive task, all those sorts of things can disrupt the brain. It's amazing (and also somewhat terrifying) how fragile the human mind is, how easy it is to break and the myriad of ways in which it can break. Not to mention there are plenty of natural phenomena which people don't understand but which can be misinterpreted.

Is it possible for thousands, even millions, of people to have similar delusions? Of course. Look at religions. They can't all be right yet all of the major ones can call forth millions of personal testimonies where supposedly their deity stepped in and did something which proves their belief true.

You claim to have actually asked god and aliens. Can you provide any objective evidence beyond repeated assertions? I can get repeated assertions from any schizophrenic locked in a padded room, I expect more from people pretending to be doing something scientific.

Like I said, I don't think GR/SR/QM are wrong. I think that the paradigms and the interpretations need some more attention.

First you might want to give them enough attention to know what they say.

I do understand that "God told me" and/or "aliens told me" is not going to attract DARPA funds.

Like I said, as someone in the research community if a work mate said that to me I'd wait for the punch line and if none comes I'd report it to someone higher up in the company as possibly as sign of mental illness and that they should be talked to about it.

When your claims are indistinguishable from mental illness you have 2 choices. Seek help or start a religion.

I wish I could write up a description of the aether medium the way I conceptualize it. But you're right, I don't have the necessary physics/mathematics skill to do it.

I fear you don't have the necessary grip on basic reasoning skills, never mind the necessary grip of mathematics and physics to work with GR or QM level concepts.

But I stand by what I said. Rapid and repeated frequency shifting, of good quality, with a high $$\frac{\Delta f}{\Delta t}$$ is going to surprise all of you.

Despite the fact I've repeatedly explained how the 'experiment' you describe doesn't do the same thing as a gravitational field.

 

[Mazulu]

Except you've shown you don't know the maths and you're ignorant of what the physics actually involves.

But you've demonstrated you haven't bothered to find out what the physics actually says. You've repeatedly misrepresented science and scientists. Speaking as someone in the physics community I can categorically state your understanding of what we say and do and think is terrible. As such all you're doing is attacking strawmen of your own construction.

Case in point.

Except no tangible evidence has ever been presented. Seeing and even hearing things is an all too common problem humans suffer from. If you're in a stressful situation, haven't slept much, being doing a repetitive task, all those sorts of things can disrupt the brain. It's amazing (and also somewhat terrifying) how fragile the human mind is, how easy it is to break and the myriad of ways in which it can break. Not to mention there are plenty of natural phenomena which people don't understand but which can be misinterpreted.

Is it possible for thousands, even millions, of people to have similar delusions? Of course. Look at religions. They can't all be right yet all of the major ones can call forth millions of personal testimonies where supposedly their deity stepped in and did something which proves their belief true.

You claim to have actually asked god and aliens. Can you provide any objective evidence beyond repeated assertions? I can get repeated assertions from any schizophrenic locked in a padded room, I expect more from people pretending to be doing something scientific.

First you might want to give them enough attention to know what they say.

Like I said, as someone in the research community if a work mate said that to me I'd wait for the punch line and if none comes I'd report it to someone higher up in the company as possibly as sign of mental illness and that they should be talked to about it.

When your claims are indistinguishable from mental illness you have 2 choices. Seek help or start a religion.

I fear you don't have the necessary grip on basic reasoning skills, never mind the necessary grip of mathematics and physics to work with GR or QM level concepts.

Despite the fact I've repeatedly explained how the 'experiment' you describe doesn't do the same thing as a gravitational field.

And you are surprised that people find you arrogant?

 

[Mazulu]

Except you've shown you don't know the maths and you're ignorant of what the physics actually involves. But you've demonstrated you haven't bothered to find out what the physics actually says. You've repeatedly misrepresented science and scientists. Speaking as someone in the physics community I can categorically state your understanding of what we say and do and think is terrible. As such all you're doing is attacking strawmen of your own construction.
Except no tangible evidence has ever been presented. Seeing and even hearing things is an all too common problem humans suffer from. If you're in a stressful situation, haven't slept much, being doing a repetitive task, all those sorts of things can disrupt the brain. It's amazing (and also somewhat terrifying) how fragile the human mind is, how easy it is to break and the myriad of ways in which it can break. Not to mention there are plenty of natural phenomena which people don't understand but which can be misinterpreted. Is it possible for thousands, even millions, of people to have similar delusions? Of course. Look at religions. They can't all be right yet all of the major ones can call forth millions of personal testimonies where supposedly their deity stepped in and did something which proves their belief true. You claim to have actually asked god and aliens. Can you provide any objective evidence beyond repeated assertions? I can get repeated assertions from any schizophrenic locked in a padded room, I expect more from people pretending to be doing something scientific. First you might want to give them enough attention to know what they say.Like I said, as someone in the research community if a work mate said that to me I'd wait for the punch line and if none comes I'd report it to someone higher up in the company as possibly as sign of mental illness and that they should be talked to about it. When your claims are indistinguishable from mental illness you have 2 choices. Seek help or start a religion.


I fear you don't have the necessary grip on basic reasoning skills...

You're some kind of super successful genius who is a leader in his field, and you have to sink to unjustified comments like that?

Despite the fact I've repeatedly explained how the 'experiment' you describe doesn't do the same thing as a gravitational field.

I have respect for someone like Arfa Brane who can ask a challenging question that forces me to think and discover new facets of physics. In contrast I have dwindling respect for people who dance, weave, dodge the important questions. For example,

You can call them what you want, it doesn't mean the name is justified. If I called them "Invisible fairy magic" would that mean fairies and magic exist?

If fairy magic showed up everywhere in physics, it would be justified. Instead, QM is called wave mechanics; there are DeBroglie waves, wave-functions. The speed of light shows up in SR and GR. It's as if the laws of physics are preoccupied with waves and properties of light. So silly me says: hey, let's make an aether medium out of EM spectrum waves!!!

If you can't see the logic of that, then I will go through the table of contents of all my physics books and count how many times I see the word "waves" or references to the properties of light. Feel free to go through yours and count the number of times you see "invisible fairy magic".

Answer my rebuttal!!!!



You excel at personal attacks that misrepresent your opponent. You'll write a whole text book to disparage someone. Then you'll write one sentence that tells me why my experiment won't work. Pathetic!

 

[AlexG]

I fear you don't have the necessary grip on basic reasoning skills...

Nothing unjustified about that.

 

[brucep]

And you are surprised that people find you arrogant?

Alphanumeric isn't arrogant you are. The arrogance of pompous ignorance. That sums you up.

 

[Mazulu]

Alphanumeric isn't arrogant you are. The arrogance of pompous ignorance. That sums you up.

Alphanumeric,
I hope you're not going to hide behind your sycophants/worshipers.

You said,

You can call them what you want, it doesn't mean the name is justified. If I called them "Invisible fairy magic" would that mean fairies and magic exist?

Then I said,

If fairy magic showed up everywhere in physics, it would be justified. Instead, QM is called wave mechanics; there are DeBroglie waves, wave-functions. The speed of light shows up in SR and GR. It's as if the laws of physics are preoccupied with waves and properties of light. So silly me says: hey, let's make an aether medium out of EM spectrum waves!!!

If you can't see the logic of that, then I will go through the table of contents of all my physics books and count how many times I see the word "waves" or references to the properties of light. Feel free to go through yours and count the number of times you see "invisible fairy magic".

So what's wrong with the idea of a medium that facilitates the EM spectrum? Aether medium waves? Why would Lorentz invariance, or lack of Lorentz invariance, make any difference if the wavelengths and the period of the EM bandwidth are nature's absolute ruler and clock?

Anyway, feel free to hide behind your worshipers and dodge my question.

 

[brucep]

Alphanumeric,
I hope you're not going to hide behind your sycophants/worshipers.

You said,

Then I said,


So what's wrong with the idea of a medium that facilitates the EM spectrum? Aether medium waves? Why would Lorentz invariance, or lack of Lorentz invariance, make any difference if the wavelengths and the period of the EM bandwidth are nature's absolute ruler and clock?

Anyway, feel free to hide behind your worshipers and dodge my question.

'The arrogance of pompous ignorance'. That sums you up. You're trolling Alphanumeric with nonsense. Making ignorant comments about the scientific literature and hard working scientists whenever you feel like it. Everything you've 'thunk up' is really stupid so YOU should become a sycophant of science, learn something, and maybe remove the stamp of ineducability from your forehead.

 

[Mazulu]

'The arrogance of pompous ignorance'. That sums you up. You're trolling Alphanumeric with nonsense. Making ignorant comments about the scientific literature and hard working scientists whenever you feel like it. Everything you've 'thunk up' is really stupid so YOU should become a sycophant of science, learn something, and maybe remove the stamp of ineducability from your forehead.

Why does Alphanumeric need a sniveling troll like you to protect him from a legitimate question? Take a hike, troll.

Alphanumeric,
Let me rephrase the question. My physics books are filled with references to the properties of light; for example: speed of light c, DeBroglie waves, phase & group velocity of waves, black body radiation, molecular spectroscopy, EM frequency band, and the list goes on. We see waves in physics all the time: e.g. wave mechanics. The speed of light is invariant for all reference frames. Maybe waves of some kind implement the laws of physics; waves with the immutable characteristic of $$ c=\lambda f?$$

 

[arfa brane]

Waves are a property of matter and energy.

What kind of logic tells you that space is "made" out of waves with zero energy? How does that even begin to make sense?
Especially since we know the vacuum has intrinsic energy.

What does "implement the laws of physics" mean? Is a falling apple "implementing" the law of gravity?

 

[Mazulu]

This concept of gravity drive Ive seen somewhere before...
Who was the first to suggest it? A science fiction author?

You may be right. I don't want to come off as SciFi. Should I change it to Acceleration Field generator?

 

[brucep]

Why does Alphanumeric need a sniveling troll like you to protect him from a legitimate question? Take a hike, troll.

Alphanumeric,
Let me rephrase the question. My physics books are filled with references to the properties of light; for example: speed of light c, DeBroglie waves, phase & group velocity of waves, black body radiation, molecular spectroscopy, EM frequency band, and the list goes on. We see waves in physics all the time: e.g. wave mechanics. The speed of light is invariant for all reference frames. Maybe waves of some kind implement the laws of physics; waves with the immutable characteristic of $$ c=\lambda f?$$

The speed of light is not invariant for all reference frames. It's not invariant for measurements in remote frames. I must have told you a hundred times and you still don't know what it means. I'm not protecting anyone. That's just another juvenile troll by Mazulu. Mazulu needs a time out to reflect on the 'magnitude of scientific irrelevance' associated with his attempted contribution to science.

 

[Mazulu]

Waves are a property of matter and energy.

What kind of logic tells you that space is "made" out of waves with zero energy? How does that even begin to make sense?
Especially since we know the vacuum has intrinsic energy.

What does "implement the laws of physics" mean? Is a falling apple "implementing" the law of gravity?

Arfa Brane!!!!
Apples are made of fibers, made of molecules, made of quantum particles. Quantum particles have DeBroglie/Matter wave properties. Waves!

I was just looking at a picture I drew when I started to think about the intrinsic energy of the vacuum. I still need to mull it over for a few days; but just off the cuff, why can't aether medium waves be the intrinsic energy of the vacuum? The answer of course is that I defined AM waves as, "without energy", more or less just information waves. But the intrinsic energy of the vacuum has gravitational potential energy. Mmm...

This is why I'm stuck on waves.
1. Plane waves are the simplest solutions to the Schrodinger equation for V = 0. The solution is just a plane wave $$\psi = Ae^{i(kx - \omega t)}$$.
2. Light-like intervals are the simplest space-time intervals between two reference frames. Light is an EM wave.

I don't know of anything in the universe that is made of more complicated parts that lead to a simple whole. It's always the other way around. Simple things combine together to make something more complex. Although Fourier waves can buck this trend.

 

[Mazulu]

The speed of light is not invariant for all reference frames. It's not invariant for measurements in remote frames. I must have told you a hundred times and you still don't know what it means. I'm not protecting anyone. That's just another juvenile troll by Mazulu. Mazulu needs a time out to reflect on the 'magnitude of scientific irrelevance' associated with his attempted contribution to science.

If waves are the clock and the measuring stick of the fabric of space-time, a strong enough gravity field might cause this mechanism to deviate from normal. That might explain why the mathematics gets far more complicated for curved space than for flat space. For flat space, c is invariant. For severely curved spacetime, invariance of c might fail; but the space-like space-time interval is still upheld, right?

 

[arfa brane]

This is why I'm stuck on waves.
1. Plane waves are the simplest solutions to the Schrodinger equation for V = 0. The solution is just a plane wave $$\psi = Ae^{i(kx - \omega t)}$$.

Well, that's the time dependent solution in one dimension. But as you know, atoms are three dimensional. The one dimensional solution has a time-independent form: just ignore the $$ \omega t $$ parameter.

2. Light-like intervals are the simplest space-time intervals between two reference frames. Light is an EM wave.

In flat spacetimes, I guess so. But you may be aware that spacetime is a manifold (of at least four dimensions); how many "solutions" are there for flat spacetimes?

I defined AM waves as, "without energy", more or less just information waves.

And I reiterate: information "waves" or any kind of information cannot be "without energy". Information has to be detectable--measurable, also "storable", "writable and readable", "erasable", "usable", etc, none of which can be said to apply to nothing, which you seem to be implying. Information can't be nothing, because it just can't.

Try this thought experiment: you're expecting a call on your 'phone. Nothing happens, you wait for some unspecified amount of time, still nada. What information do you have?

 

[brucep]

If waves are the clock and the measuring stick of the fabric of space-time, a strong enough gravity field might cause this mechanism to deviate from normal. That might explain why the mathematics gets far more complicated for curved space than for flat space. For flat space, c is invariant. For severely curved spacetime, invariance of c might fail; but the space-like space-time interval is still upheld, right?

GR describes the natural path of light in the weak and strong fields perfectly. All local measurements of the coordinate speed of light are invariant. No matter how curved the spacetime is there's always a segment of an objects path where the effects of gravity can be ignored for most LOCAL experimental measurements. So if you're in freefall [natural motion] inside the event horizon and you measure the local coordinate speed of light it's still invariant. You tend to call me mean and hateful. You did it in support of the ridiculous experiment proposed by Chinglu. You're an intellectual pariah. You make unsupportable claims where you think 'because you thought of it' it's fact. Since that's 'the complete book on you' time for a non posting period to figure out how you're going to apologize for the Mazulu 'idiot wind' disrespecting the scientific literature, scientists, and subsequently yourself. There should be a level of intellectual honesty required of all forum members. IE: if you continue trolling nonsense you should be suspended and if you come back doing the same thing you should be banned from the discussion.

 

[Mazulu]

GR describes the natural path of light in the weak and strong fields perfectly.

As it should.

All local measurements of the coordinate speed of light are invariant. No matter how curved the spacetime is there's always a segment of an objects path where the effects of gravity can be ignored for most LOCAL experimental measurements.

The speed of light is supposed to be invariant locally. The coordinate speed of light is (correct if wrong) is not local.

So if you're in freefall [natural motion] inside the event horizon and you measure the local coordinate speed of light it's still invariant.

Yes, invariant with any other coordinate system locally.

You tend to call me mean and hateful. You did it in support of the ridiculous experiment proposed by Chinglu. You're an intellectual pariah. You make unsupportable claims where you think 'because you thought of it' it's fact. Since that's 'the complete book on you' time for a non posting period to figure out how you're going to apologize for the Mazulu 'idiot wind' disrespecting the scientific literature, scientists, and subsequently yourself. There should be a level of intellectual honesty required of all forum members. IE: if you continue trolling nonsense you should be suspended and if you come back doing the same thing you should be banned from the discussion.

Be the teacher. Teach us ignorant savages some proper physics.