I have a pseudoscientific hypothesis regarding the propulsion mechanism of observed UFOs



Eric Laithwaite's explanation of mass transfer,but I am not in 100% understanding of it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAEFQBj76TQ

http://www.gyroscopes.org/masstran.asp


James Woodward explains impulse engines here

http://physics.fullerton.edu/~jimw/nasa-pap/

I tried to figure it out and it appears that Mach's principle can allow for gravitational acceleration without violating conservation of energy...

http://img560.imageshack.us/img560/4195/gravitypropulsion.png

Robert L. Forward theorized a heavy rotating ring for gravitational propulsion purposes:

http://u2.lege.net/culture.zapto.org_82_20080124/antigravidity/Robert%20L.Forward%20-%20Guidelines%20to%20Antigravity.pdf

Rotating a metal ring at relativistic speeds would cause it to fly apart but maybe the same effect can occur with the the same gravitational field strength by rotating a large superconducting disk at lower speeds...

Whatever the case, that leaves us amateur garage experimenters out of the loop :D






...

Damn. I thought it was something MythBusters could recreate. =P

The aliens have to use some sort of technology for prupolusion. We just need to find what.

UFO's use UPS.

Which is not the United Parcal Service, it is Unidentified Propulsion System, it is 'manned' by ULGF Unidentified Little Green, uh Fellows.

Khan,

I doubt if any of those methods described in the links are on track. They qualify as a classic physics concept once dubbed "Net INertial Propulsion." Although the gyroscopic centrifugal force parallel to the planet's great circle, normal to the gyroscope's axis tends to thrust away a bit from the point where the axis is normal to the planet, this is not a "star drive."

You may want to look up "pushing gravity." Whether gravity defies Occam's Razor by reaching out and grabbing via a weak force loop or is an inbound flow of tachyonic particles, perhaps the Higgs Boson, UFO's likely deflect the force itself, around and through the vessel, so the UFO rises like a bubble in a beaker of water.

hypothesis regarding the propulsion mechanism of observed UFOs

If depends on the UFO;

Balloons, birds and debris. The propulsion is the wind.

Terrestrial air craft. This is primarily gas turbines with some internal combustion engines contributing

Satellites. Solid and liquid rocket engines to put them in orbit - then gravity.

Venus, Saturn, Sirius etc. Gravity.

If depends on the UFO;

Balloons, birds and debris. The propulsion is the wind.

Terrestrial air craft. This is primarily gas turbines with some internal combustion engines contributing

Satellites. Solid and liquid rocket engines to put them in orbit - then gravity.

Venus, Saturn, Sirius etc. Gravity.

Gravity... Would you mind giving a non-speculative, conclusive definition of what causes gravity and Gravity?

http://www.sciforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=4531&stc=1&d=1329861651

do you suppose it may resemble a process defined by a field of this geometry?

just eliminate atmosphereic pressure by eliminating matter in the air , what constitutes air around the ship , three dimensionally

the source of propulsion then becomes irrelevant

An interesting theory that uses negative mass for the spinning ring inside the UFO.

http://www.thephysicsofufos.com/index.html

Gravity... Would you mind giving a non-speculative, conclusive definition of what causes gravity and Gravity?


According to GR which has been experiementally shown to be correct, Gravity is the curvature of space time.

The cause of this curvature is mass and energy.

Repulsive gravity could occur naturally in the universe...

http://www.hpc.unm.edu/~alsing/Courses/GR/GR_Fall_2008/papers/deFelice_AJP_76_p671_Y08_lightcones_repulsive_grav .pdf



Contrary to common belief, gravitation can also be repulsive. Examples of repulsive gravity are provided by the naked singularity solutions of the Einstein equations corresponding to the negative mass Schwarzschild, the Reissner–Nordström, and the Kerr spacetimes. We show that their repulsive gravity regions can be identified by a particular behavior of the light cones when use is made of symmetry-adapted coordinate systems.


Gravitational repulsion with a possible experiemnt...

http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2010/PP-23-08.PDF


A localized repulsive gravity field would allow for an object to hover at a fixed distance from the surface of the Earth, depending on the strength of the field, much like the way two magnets would repel each other to a fixed distance.

Hopefully we will have hover-boards by 2015 :D

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0c/Hover_board.jpg/300px-Hover_board.jpg


Extracting Gravitational Energy From The Homogeneous Isotropic Universe

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9605001



Extracting Gravitational Energy From The Homogeneous Isotropic Universe
Eue Jin Jeong
(Submitted on 1 May 1996 (v1), last revised 4 May 1996 (this version, v2))

The kinetic energy of a local system of objects placed in a curved spacetime is gained by the subsequent acceleration of the object following the more contracted region of spacetime. Normally this happens near massive gravitating stars. However, the gravitational dipole moment has been shown to be capable of self creating asymmetrically distorted spacetime in its vicinity, therby, capable of being accelerated indefinitely following the successive self created loophole of the spacetime. Localization of this kinetic energy may be possible by designing a system that uses the artificially created gavitational dipole moments to rotate the main axis. A mechanical constraint is derived for the extraction of unlimited gravitational energy from such system.


[...]

It is possible that the energy created here now may be lost somewhere some other time in the universe in such a way that the total mass energy of the entire universe remains always constant, although it’s an uncomfortable conjecture that may never be proved. Still, on the surface, the energy can be obtained only when the homogeneous isotropic universe is assumed to be filled with matter, exerting long range gravitational interactions, not in the
universe which is totally void.


Dark energy possibly has negative mass...

http://www.economist.com/node/21547760

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlDl9w8ariI

An interesting theory that uses negative mass for the spinning ring inside the UFO.

http://www.thephysicsofufos.com/index.html

Suppose that Earth is negative mass, and Gravity is positive mass, and a human is negative mass. Then reverse all of the linked diagram to match that scenario. Now the Earth is a bubble in a custard powder...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/norfolk/kids/science_experiments/curious_custard/custard_01.shtml

... space is a liquid solid. A NASA spacecraft is a sponge of holes travelling through custard powder. Dark Matter is clumped custard powder. Gravitational lensing is clumped custard powder. The force that holds us to the Earth is the change from the custard powder from a liquid to a solid. Now we measure mass, we get the mass of the change from liquid to solid, and we confuse that with Earth = mass, not Earth = Negative mass.

... space is a liquid solid. A NASA spacecraft is a sponge of holes travelling through custard powder. Dark Matter is clumped custard powder. Gravitational lensing is clumped custard powder. The force that holds us to the Earth is the change from the custard powder from a liquid to a solid. Now we measure mass, we get the mass of the change from liquid to solid, and we confuse that with Earth = mass, not Earth = Negative mass.

That idea probably will not work because of Newton's first law of motion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_laws_of_motion

The velocity of an object remains constant unless it is acted upon by an external force.

In the vacuum of space outside of atmosphere, your hypothesized custard powder-space would provide a resistive viscous force to an object, slowing it down but that does not happen.

...

Some theorized properties of negative mass



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_mass



For two positive masses, nothing changes and we have a pull on each other causing an attraction. Two negative masses would produce a pull on one another, but would repel because of their negative inertial masses. For different signs we get a push, that repels the positive mass but attracts the negative mass.

Bondi pointed out objects of equal and opposite mass this would produce a constant acceleration of the system towards the positive mass object. However, the total mass, momentum and energy of the system would remain 0.

This behavior is completely inconsistent with a common-sense approach and the expected behaviour of 'normal' matter; but is completely mathematically consistent and introduces no violation of conservation of momentum or energy.

That idea probably will not work because of Newton's first law of motion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_laws_of_motion

The velocity of an object remains constant unless it is acted upon by an external force.

In the vacuum of space outside of atmosphere, your hypothesized custard powder-space would provide a resistive viscous force to an object, slowing it down but that does not happen.

...

Some theorized properties of negative mass



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_mass

It would not produce a force on a bubble. In water the bubbles are free, all you are doing is reversing the forces. Anyway, this custard powder has a scaling force, and the scaling force is the bending of space time. Not the sort of physics that has been calculated in the past in this way. You are working on mass v's mass, not mass v's negative mass.

Mass v's mass....

First law: The velocity of a body remains constant unless the body is acted upon by an external force.

Second law: The acceleration a of a body is parallel and directly proportional to the net force F and inversely proportional to the mass m, i.e., F = ma.

Third law: The mutual forces of action and reaction between two bodies are equal, opposite and collinear.


mass v's Negative mass

Net result = 0

Faster than light travel....

"In Michio Kaku's new book, Parallel Worlds, Kaku explains an idea that was proposed by Richard Gott in 1991 where a space craft could circle two cosmic strings as they collided/passed each other (or wrap a single cosmic string in a sort of incomplete square so that two 'sides' of the square would rush towards each other due to their gravitational attraction, which would be the same as two separate cosmic strings). The resulting space around the colliding strings is contracted, allowing the space craft to accelerate faster than light according to an external observer, though not exceed the speed of light according to the space craft's frame of reference."

It would not produce a force on a bubble. In water the bubbles are free, all you are doing is reversing the forces. Anyway, this custard powder has a scaling force, and the scaling force is the bending of space time.


Air bubbles in water are not free, they must obey Newton's laws and they float upwards towards the surface.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bouyancy

You might be trying to say that space has fluid-like properties and mass would be analogous to bubbles, in that the bubbles would tend to attract other bubbles and cluster together as they become squeezed by the fluid pressures of space itself :shrug:

Gravity would be analogous to the fluid pressures that squeeze bubbles together and electromagnetism would be like tension forces that keep bubbles from breaking up into zillions of microbubbles.

Of course your analogy does not explain how mass can increase in density and form the bubble version of a black hole. :itold:

Faster than light travel....

"In Michio Kaku's new book, Parallel Worlds, Kaku explains an idea that was proposed by Richard Gott in 1991 where a space craft could circle two cosmic strings as they collided/passed each other (or wrap a single cosmic string in a sort of incomplete square so that two 'sides' of the square would rush towards each other due to their gravitational attraction, which would be the same as two separate cosmic strings). The resulting space around the colliding strings is contracted, allowing the space craft to accelerate faster than light according to an external observer, though not exceed the speed of light according to the space craft's frame of reference."

Cosmic strings are interesting :D

http://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/everyday-myths/time-travel5.htm



Quantum strings are highly speculative, however. Gott himself said that in order to travel back in time even one year, it would take a loop of string that contained half the mass-energy of an entire galaxy. In other words, you'd have to split half the atoms in the galaxy to power your time machine. And, as with any time machine, you couldn't go back farther than the point at which the time machine was created.

Oh yes, and then there are the time paradoxes.

Air bubbles in water are not free, they must obey Newton's laws and they float upwards towards the surface.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bouyancy

You might be trying to say that space has fluid-like properties and mass would be analogous to bubbles, in that the bubbles would tend to attract other bubbles and cluster together as they become squeezed by the fluid pressures of space itself :shrug:

Gravity would be analogous to the fluid pressures that squeeze bubbles together and electromagnetism would be like tension forces that keep bubbles from breaking up into zillions of microbubbles.

Of course your analogy does not explain how mass can increase in density and form the bubble version of a black hole. :itold:

It would lower in density to create a black hole, the black hole would be negative mass..ie a hole :itold:

It would lower in density to create a black hole, the black hole would be negative mass..ie a hole :itold:

Going by your analogy, a small particle of mass would be a small diameter "more dense" bubble and a black hole would be small diameter "less dense" bubble. But that still does not work because how can many small increased density bubbles[particles] be squeezed together to make a single LESS dense bubble of the same diameter of a single high density bubble-particle?

Density = mass/volume :scratchin:

Going by your analogy, a small particle of mass would be a small diameter "more dense" bubble and a black hole would be small diameter "less dense" bubble. But that still does not work because how can many small increased density bubbles[particles] be squeezed together to make a single LESS dense bubble of the same diameter of a single high density bubble-particle?

Density = mass/volume :scratchin:

Because gravity is reversed, and now flows into holes instead of attracted towards mass. It's a lot more logical. The swing is from + to -, and a black Hole is a big -. When Einstein thought of the cosmological constant it was to stabilise the Universe from collapsing in on itself, by reversing the mass you don't get collapse you get expansion... expansion of holes, the Galaxies are the holes. Holes allow flow, but also create valleys, and valleys push apart. Between Galaxies you get the valleys.. Dark Flow. And negatives grow, not shrink. -6 and +6 are the same size, as are -1000 and +1000. But the minus is a hole. It's best to think of them as convex, and concave.

Because gravity is reversed, and now flows into holes instead of attracted towards mass. It's a lot more logical. The swing is from + to -, and a black Hole is a big -. When Einstein thought of the cosmological constant it was to stabilise the Universe from collapsing in on itself, by reversing the mass you don't get collapse you get expansion... expansion of holes, the Galaxies are the holes. Holes allow flow, but also create valleys, and valleys push apart. Between Galaxies you get the valleys.. Dark Flow.

I am struggling to understand your theory Pincho. I might eventually grasp the fundamentals of your ideas if I keep trying :m:

What are your thoughts on UFO propulsion and anti-gravity?

Well once you get everything in the right order Magnetism is anti-Gravity. It is the outflow of gravity. But Gravity is not the weak force, it is the stronger force, and you are trying to resist something like this....

Gravity = 100
Magnetism = 99

F = G - Mag

So you are outnumbered. You are outnumbered because of the switch from Gravity to magnetism. G switches to Mag, first, and every attempt to use Mag has a preceding G.

It's a bit like counting...

G = 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
Mag = 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8

Notice however that G is maintaining just a score of 1.

I am struggling to understand your theory Pincho. I might eventually grasp the fundamentals of your ideas if I keep trying :m:


I recommend that you abandon your attempt to understand Pinchos ideas. If you understand and accept them you will be reduced to drooling, babbling, member of a 'home'.

His ideas make no sense at all - so if they make sense to you all hope is lost.

If something is going to utilise gravity or change its effects, then it must be able to change matter itself. So long as the device uses normal matter it will not work.

Well once you get everything in the right order Magnetism is anti-Gravity. It is the outflow of gravity. But Gravity is not the weak force, it is the stronger force, and you are trying to resist something like this....Gravity = 100, Magnetism = 99, F = G - Mag
So you are outnumbered. You are outnumbered because of the switch from Gravity to magnetism. G switches to Mag, first, and every attempt to use Mag has a preceding G. It's a bit like counting...G = 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 Mag = 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8
Notice however that G is maintaining just a score of 1.

You have something here, there is a relationship between M and G. I hope you have not been banned.
If you are right, you may be misrepresented.