Subject:
|
Re: Wings [was: Re: Building big]
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space, lugnet.loc.au
|
Date:
|
Fri, 22 Jun 2001 20:31:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
7324 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.space, David Drew writes:
> Hi.
> Gravity generators per se are not in violation of the laws of physics.
> However, they are far in advance of any current technology that we have. In
> order to generate an artificial gravity field, without the use of
> centrifugal force, we'd have to create and manipulate graviton particles.
>
> For each of the fundamental forces, there is a fundamental boson which
> carries the 'information' from one particle to another. How do two electrons
> know how to react to each other? The photon 'carries' information from one
> electron to the other, 'telling' it about the existence of the other
> particle. How do two bodies know that the other exists, and that it's
> attracted to it? The graviton 'carries' that information.
>
> The only problem is, we haven't even seen the graviton in an experimental
> situation. We are not even vaguely close to some method of generating or
> manipulating gravitons, in order to create an artificial gravity field in
> space, or on the earth. Our very first application would be some method of
> 'blocking' the gravitons, so that we could create zero gravity on earth. The
> possibilities of that would be endless, and whoever could make such a device
> would swiftly be Richer Than God.
>
> Since no such device is currently being fitted to 747's, I think it's a safe
> bet to say that artificial gravity in any form does not exist. Apart from
> using centrifugal force to 'fake' it. Even that isn't in use in space
> situations.
>
> later,
> David Drew.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jesse Alan Long" <joyous4god2@yahoo.com>
> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 7:01 AM
>
> Thank you, Bill, for telling me what the name of that technology was in my
> letter. There is a fatal flaw in your response, however, Bill. You seem to
> think that it is impossible to conduct this type of technology yet you
> already answered how people, at least with the technology that we have
> developed in society, could develop such an "artificial gravity" system. I
> am not sure how that the gravity generators are a violation of the laws of
> physics so please explain this logic to me, Bill.
> Jesse Long
The first issue in this reply is no person can become richer than God
because God gave people the concept of money and currency in their minds. I
could devote a whole other letter about this situation but I am not talking
about religion in this letter. What is the difference between a photon and
a proton and did you mean to say "proton" in the space where you said
"photon?" I also have another question, what is a graviton particle? I am
not very experienced in the laws of physics because I have not taken these
courses in college. Please explain these concepts to me, David.
Jesse Long
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Wings [was: Re: Building big]
|
| Hi. Gravity generators per se are not in violation of the laws of physics. However, they are far in advance of any current technology that we have. In order to generate an artificial gravity field, without the use of centrifugal force, we'd have to (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.space, lugnet.loc.au)
|
195 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
