Live data from Hacker News

Military Has Been Researching "Anti-Gravity" For Nearly 70 Years

thedrive.com

71–80 of 161 posts

Re: Military Has Been Researching "Anti-Gravity" For Nearly 70 Years

#71
post #46
post #27

Physicists have been searching for variations in the coupling of materials to gravity for more than a century, and by some measure, for more than a millenium. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principle#Tests_of... Every experiment anyone has ever tried has come up empty. The equivalence principle is a postulate (Einstein's "happiest idea") that underlies General Relativity, making it essential to test. (Sour…

How much money does society need to spend supporting the work you do before we can safely conclude that Einstein was actually correct and we don't need to test it any more?

It depends where you test.

General relativity should be tested and verified in energies and conditions where it has no been tested yet, because it's likely that there is crack there somewhere.

Many those military research projects mentioned in the article are pure crackpot science. They search where it easy to search and reasons to do so are usually based on misunderstandings of existing theory.

Re: Military Has Been Researching "Anti-Gravity" For Nearly 70 Years

#72
post #43

What is the currently accepted answer to the question, "what is gravity"?

Einstein believed gravity isn't really a force in the same sense as the other three fundamental forces, but a property of space-time. That seems to be a problem because it causes some kind of "incompatibilty" with the others. Trying to reconcile those, efforts has been made to create quantum gravity theories, that view space itself as quantized and in this direction you find strings and quantum loop gravity. Disclaim…

IANAP either but as far as I understand the incompatibility is not on wether gravity is a force or not (that's just a way to interpret the equations). The issue is that all attempts to quantize gravity have failed so far (due to the specific mathematical properties of the gravitational field) and QFT would require gravity to be quantized to interact with other quantum fields.

Re: Military Has Been Researching "Anti-Gravity" For Nearly 70 Years

#73
post #63
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gravity is one of the essential forces in nature. If you want to explain it in simpler terms it is not possible because gravity is the simpler thing. You can use gravity to explain other things, but you cannot use other things to explain gravity.

That’s not really true. The other 3 “fundamental” forces are irreducible yet still entirely explained by the standard model.

Well, gravity is similarly explained by general relativity.

Re: Military Has Been Researching "Anti-Gravity" For Nearly 70 Years

#74
post #2

There are Gravity Stones from the 60's scattered among US colleges to > "remind students of the blessings forthcoming when a semi-insulator is discovered in order to harness gravity as a free power and reduce airplane accidents" Decent way to get students thinking about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_Research_Foundation#Mo...

Oh the story behind that is a wild ride from start to finish. Babson's sister drowned when they were children, and he decided the real reason that happened is anti-gravity technology wasn't sufficiently advanced to prevent her drowning. He spent a large amount of his philanthropy funding anti-gravity research for the rest of his life. Edit: Just realized this is mentioned in the article you linked.

It's still worth a call-out. The other line in the article that always gets me is "Sometimes, attendees [of the Gravity Research Foundation] sat in chairs with their feet higher than their heads, to counterbalance gravity."

It feels like absurd lore in Fallout, but probably actually happened.

Re: Military Has Been Researching "Anti-Gravity" For Nearly 70 Years

#75
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a great and important question. (doubly so for me, as constrained resources may see me leave the field, to which I have devoted my entire professional life, in the coming months) We are perennially grateful for the support we receive to do the work that we do. To a high degree of approximation, Einstein's predictions are very, very correct. We are trying to look very carefully at Nature because we don't think…

Some argue that keeping talented people out of industry is a downside of the sciences not an upside. Personally, particle physics irritates me because I don't believe in particles... It's all vibrations, man :)

Academia isn't keeping talented people out of the industry. At any point, a talented person can leave the university, join a company, and easily quintuple their earnings.

It's the industry that's keeping talented people out by giving them mundane or bullshit jobs, and not leaving any space for long-term research and vision.

Re: Military Has Been Researching "Anti-Gravity" For Nearly 70 Years

#76
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Time travel back into the past is understood to be impossible.

Physicist here (by degree, not profession). What you state is not true: by currently accepted physical theories, time travel to the past IS very much possible. It's known as a "closed, time-like curve" in the literature. Now, most mechanisms explored for doing so wouldn't allow travel back further than the initial creation of the time travel device, so you could say that time travel to our past is not possible since…

You can't get CTCs in Minkowski space.

Hawking 1982 https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.46.603 has an excellent argument based on gravitational backreaction about the implausibility of CTCs (and closed null curves) in any finite spacetime, including expanding spacetimes in which there are cosmic horizons at finite distances. In our standard cosmology you'd need extremely exotic matter.

> general relativity allows it

General Relativity requires neither the WEC nor the Lorentzian (1,3,0) metric signature (e.g. one can use a signature discontinuity on some hypersurface or atypical values for (virt,phys,rank)). You can describe low-entropy "objects" with all sorts of unaligned directions for their arrows-of-time that way, but good luck explaining the observations of the cosmic microwave background or recovering Special Relativity in a lab test. AWEC is there to give us large scale structure at all, not "purely to think up a way time travel paradoxes might be avoided".

> paradoxical situations could be constructed--e.g. going back in time and killing yourself

Start much more easily. Set up a worldtube containing the timelike and null paths for para-positronium in an anti-de Sitter_{3} space in 1+3 Minkowski space by tracing the worldtubes of the leptons and the photons as they loop around for some small multiple of the lifetime of para-positronium. You'll want the block universe view: at any given point on each closed there is a frozen configuration. Coarsely, at each point (t,x,y,z) on the loop of each CTC there is an electron, a positron, or neither; more technically the conjugate variables at each point on a closed curve are fixed. So you need a way to recover the para-positronium from the photons. There seems to be a lot fewer degrees of freedom than in the absence of the CTC!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positronium#States

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-de_Sitter_space#Closed_ti...

You'll quickly find that thinking of a human being (radiating in the IR while metabolizing, shedding skin and hair, perspiring, and so on) "lucky" enough to be near a supersymmetric charged rotating black hole in AdS_{5} with microscopic parts on a large set of worldtubes some of which are closed (some closed and timelike, some closed and null) and some of which might not be, is so intractable that you can only make extremely wild guesses about interactions with a grandparent whose microscopic components are almost entirely not on closed curves.

> Physics, as currently understood from available experimental evidence, 100% allows time travel to the past

No time travellers showed up at Hawking's champagne party afaict, but maybe they were sneakily stealing socks out of his washing machine rather than trying to make small talk.

> paradoxes

Most of these vanish in a block universe view where everything is encoded in a nontrivial set of spacetime-filling fields. Lots of apparent paradoxes arise from incomplete values surfaces in initial values formulations. Lots of others relate to something similar to pareidolia where given a block universe people will insist that they see faces and cats and planets without admitting that they're imposing a particular time axis (and orientation) and using that as a basis for segmenting a huge bunch of worldtubes (that collectively they take as being a single object).

Re: Military Has Been Researching "Anti-Gravity" For Nearly 70 Years

#77
post #2

There are Gravity Stones from the 60's scattered among US colleges to > "remind students of the blessings forthcoming when a semi-insulator is discovered in order to harness gravity as a free power and reduce airplane accidents" Decent way to get students thinking about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_Research_Foundation#Mo...

Why did he think to mention airplanes? The whole concept of airplanes would be obsolete with anti-gravity.

Re: Military Has Been Researching "Anti-Gravity" For Nearly 70 Years

#78
post #70

I love the following Feynman's quote: ``In those days, one of the theories proposed was that the planets went around because behind them were invisible angels, beating their wings and driving the planets forward. You will see that this theory is now modified! It turns out that in order to keep the planets going around, the invisible angels must fly in a different direction and they have no wings. Otherwise, it is a s…

Gravity is very similar to magnetism, a "magically" attracting force of distinct objects. The explanation is very easy via fields. Just trying to explain it via particles will get you into trouble, e.g. the flawed standard model, or the Higgs. Einstein was pretty close in his spacetime bending explanation, but this still doesn't explain dark matter or the recent gravity experiments with fast rotating magnets in stron…

> Gravity is very similar to magnetism

The analogy doesn’t help, even ignoring that what we experience day-to-day is more like an electric field and there is a different gravitational analogy for magnetism, AKA gravitomagetism. It’s harder to notice than gravitational time dilation.

> easy via fields

Only for people who find non-Euclidian geometry that mixes time and space and is defined by a bunch of 4x4 tensors to be “easy”.

> [particles bad fields good]

“Particle” is a convenient human-scale name for things, but everything’s fields these days anyway. Even the Higgs.

In fact, GR is field-only — it’s QM which says “by the way, those things you call particles are a certain type of excitation in a field” and “if the gravity field has a particle it must be a massless spin-2 boson, also every massless spin-2 field is indistinguishable from gravity”.

> doesn’t explain dark matter

Doesn’t need to. It says there’s something to look for. GR is “stuff does X”, the observation is “X”, so there must be stuff. We’re can’t see stuff, but GR doesn’t say we have to be able to see it.

> fast rotating magnets

I don’t know what you’re referring to, the closest pattern I am matching your words to is Podkletnov whose work was never reproducible by third parties, and you can bet SpaceX will have tried.

> better gravity field theories out there, but they are lacking experimental verification

Science doesn’t use verification, it uses falsification. When an hypothesis can’t be falsified even in principle it isn’t science; when it can but only in principle, it’s a hypothesis; when it has been tested and the attempt to falsify it results in evidence that persistently doesn’t falsify it to a standard of statistical significance, then it gets published and perhaps elevated to the level of “theory”.

Re: Military Has Been Researching "Anti-Gravity" For Nearly 70 Years

#79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some argue that keeping talented people out of industry is a downside of the sciences not an upside. Personally, particle physics irritates me because I don't believe in particles... It's all vibrations, man :)

Academia isn't keeping talented people out of the industry. At any point, a talented person can leave the university, join a company, and easily quintuple their earnings. It's the industry that's keeping talented people out by giving them mundane or bullshit jobs, and not leaving any space for long-term research and vision.

Though I might say that Academia is making a good job of keeping talented people out of it because their incentive structure is skewed.

Re: Military Has Been Researching "Anti-Gravity" For Nearly 70 Years

#80

What is the currently accepted answer to the question, "what is gravity"?

It is an illusion. You are floating freely in the space, but massive mass near-by is causing curvature in space-time. In other words: Time goes more slowly in your shoes, because they are closer to the mass. This causes any movement to be circular movement, which is pressing you to the near-by mass, which you experience as "gravity".

Wow, what an excellent way of phrasing it. Give me more. Why "any movement is circular"?
Post reply on HN