Anti-Gravity/ The Energy Machine

I believe the next substantial invention to mankind will be The Energy Machine. The energy machine is a machine that uses magnets to create energy and never loses energy. Of course this hasn't been created yet but eventually once we understand how to harness this power than we can possibly alter gravity to create anti-gravity. The basic principal behind anti-gravity is creating a way to repel gravity from something allowing no friction to occuer. This is how we can travel fast through the cosmos. Having a anti-gravitational barrier surrounding a space ship we can essentially slide down the ice for universal space exploration.

WIth the creation of these things we can finally figure out our transportation problem by lifting up the cars into the sky.

Now this thread is for the traverse of ideas on how the Energy Machine could be constructed aswell as views on certain aspects of gravity and ways to alter it.

 

One of the big laws I learned in school was that energy cannot be created nor destroyed. Interesting ideas, though

 

Were not creating energy, simply using the energy found and used within magnets to duplicate it. The energy of magnets and gravity is practically limitless, we just need to find a way to harness this invisible force and alter it for our own purposes.

 

Magnets do not have near infinite energy. Everytime you make a magnetic field do work then domains within the magnet reconfigure, until eventually the magnet is demagnetised. Similarly if you take energy from a gravitational field then the object creating the field will loose angular momentum.

 

Tony

Nice analogy. But gravitics never 'run down'. magnetics do.
You can have a dead magnet.. But not a dead gravitic.

Occam

 

Frost

The only law i learnt in school was that lisa farha had white undies..[oooohhohoohhhh]
And that hardons never go away which contradicts the second law of entropy even if the teacher would not comment on my problem when i asked about it...hehehe
Yes i actually asked this in class.. lisa was pissed and i got suspended... lol... man did i have a hardon.
You can see how i got to be what i am today.

Occam

 

Go google video: Thunderbolts of the Gods. before you post here everyone. lol.

besides, i bet the government has recieved this info from life sources outside the earth, say back in the 50s or 60ss, and they use it secretly, so the economic structure they have taken so long to build, will not fall, as humans start to open the narrow mind of "what is" around them.

 

Your right in that a body with no angular momentum will still have a gravitational field, although it will not be orbiting. The magnet is really the odd case, a permanent magnet is really a very complicated object. To think of a gravitational field its makes more sense to compare to a charged object like an electron attracting another. As two masses are mutually attracted they impart momentum to each other, conserving both energy and momentum. The field does not possess energy it merely mediates its transfer between two bodies. The example I was obtusely referring to was tidal power. We can use the tide to generate electricity, however by conservation of energy something else must be loosing energy. The tide is created by the moon, so the energy comes from the sea which in turn comes from the interaction between the Earth and the Moon. So using the tide to generate energy reduces the angular momentum of the Moon around the Earth causing the moons orbit to degrade. A tidal barrier such as the proposed one across the Severn estuary in the UK would cause the moon to collide with the Earth in only 20-30 billion years. So technically its not a renewable source, though I guess in that time we may be able to pull the moon back out again.

 

let's just not alter the gravity of the moon so much to have it collide with the Earth, eeeee....that won't be good.

I do believe their is a connection between magnets and gravity.

 

Tony

But the two bodies started with X energy..
They are mutually attracted by the factor of gravitics..
which seems to give them energy they did not originally posess.
Why do they move together and transfer energy they
did no have while a light year from eachother?

Gravity and space work together.. to overseer mass.
But gravity is mass influencing space.
Mass does what its told. by space..

Space.. the thing we know least about.. is the key.

Thus gravitics provide a seemingly endless amount of energy.
Bodies orbit . transfer angular momentum.. an even collide..
But the MASS never looses an iota of abillity to provide more attraction
and transfer of angular momentum.
Where does this energy to move itself and other mass come from.??

Zero point energy?

Mass and space are i think two facets of the same thing.
What that thing is, is beyond our science.
Its the thing that produces time dilation as well.
Mass/space/time...[process rate]

I just love this reality.. its FULL of questions to be answered.

Occam

 

The wiki entry for the two body gravitational problem is quite well written, certainly better than I could write here. It uses classical mechanics to explain the transfer of momentum between two bodies. Needless to say that if two bodies with a graviational field and with 0 momentum are placed close to each other along the axis. So at t=0 each will have momentum p1 = p2 = 0. After some time t they will have momentum p1 = p and p2 = -p, so p1 + p2 = 0, conserving momentum.

I think presume the energy your referring to is potential energy, roughly calculated by V(x) = mgh. More conceptially it is an energy associated with a particles position in space. In my above example, this quantity will reduce as the potential energy is converted to kinetic energy. However this is not above the law of conservation of energy, when the two masses collide the gravitational potential energy will be 0.

 

try a 5 body problem.. not even a cray can do that.

No not potential.. existing.
And we have no idea where that energy comes from.
Why will masses accelerate towards eachother..
and GAIN energy.. from where?
Mass does not move unless energy is applied.. yes.?
Yet no science i know says where it came from..they say..
'gravity caused this' or ' according to gravitic law'
But NO ONE knows what causes that law to work.
Its like 'dont do this or the police will get you' but noone knows where police come from or why they exist.

all our math means nothing but the abillity to describe what we KNOW.

And we dont know this. [what gravity IS]
[we dont even know what mater is,, and were made of it]

[just putting math/science in its place alongside philosophy and art..]

When will human 'science' admit it is ignorant of 95% of what IS.
We strut and say we know. Yet we dont know what time is. what space
is, what gravity is. what reality is .. we a preening toddlers.

We are smart enought in 2008 to describe structure/process
in organised reality.
The lower levels. But we no NOTHING of the deep causes.

Because as a species we are equivalent of a 4 year old.

The 1st step to undersanding is understanding what we dont know.

Occam

 

N-body modeling is done quite frequently now, but there is not an analytical solution for many body problems (larger than 2), it has to be done iteratively, this usually means with a computer for any sensible systems.

I said fields don't have energy largely to avoid getting into the mess that is the quantum field, particularly as this discussion was originally only about gravity. For the electric field it is normal to give the field an energy equal to the potential energy of the system. Its not easy to see where the potential energy is 'stored'. It is easier to think of the energy of the system. This quantity is absolutely conserved in every experiment so far carried out. You are correct in saying that Gravity is, perhaps, the least well understood of the forces. The properties of the electromagnetic interaction on the otherhand is fantastically well understood, its hard to overstate how well quantum field theory has explained electromagnetism, currently it has been shown accurate to one part in a billion billion (1x10-12). While the same cannot be said of gravity gravitational systems do obey conservation of energy. The energy for this comes from the curvature of space time if general relativity is to be believed.

Anyway, I would say we're ignorant to way more than 95% of Physics. But the 5% we do seem to know about really hates the idea of getting something for nothing, which is more or less how this thread started.

 

Tony

Well said

Occam

PS. I mean no disrespect to math in my posts.. its the ego of some mathematicians that sound like that guy in the 1800's who said
"there is no more to discover, we know it all'
The language of math is sublime.
Its the humans that need a kick in the pants lol

PPS. it would be interesting to watch the processor use graph of
say IBM's blue gene/l working on a 4 body problem.
especially one with 2 binary pairs intersecting.
Would 130+ terraflops be enough?
hmmmmm

PPPS.
gravitational systems do obey conservation of energy. The energy for this comes from the curvature of space time if general relativity is to be believed.

 

http://www.top-shareware.net/solar-system.html do the whole solar system on your desktop

 

Some really nice screensavers there, thanks.
Astrograv looks great, can't wait to play with it.

Thank myself i have a top end overclocked processor[prescott 3.2]>[3.6 ghz]
Looks like it will get used now.

thanks again

Occam

 

What an anti graviton. I would settle for anti matter. or saving that nuclear fusion.

 

Thus spake Socrates 2500 years ago.

 

Exactly
"I know that i know nothing" [well very little]

Occam

 

I think that was Thompson/Kelvin but I'm not sure.