 | | Re: Anti Grav (was Say it ain't so...) —Jordan Greer
| | | | (...) Actually, anti-gravity is a rather misleading term, for several reasons. First off, "anti-gravity" implies that you are utilizing the polar opposite of the force of gravity. Polar opposites of basic forces do not exist. Secondly, (...) (22 years ago, 11-Aug-02, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Anti Grav (was Say it ain't so...) —Luke Ma
| | | | | Let me be the resident geek again... (...) Well...in a sense they do. The current theory (particle-based theory anyway) is that there is an exchanging particle for all the basic forces. For electromagnetic forces, it's the photon. Don't misread that (...) (22 years ago, 13-Aug-02, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Anti Grav (was Say it ain't so...) —Adrian Egli
| | | | | Isn't this a topic more tuned for lugnet.off-topic.geek? Just ask'n. (X-posted it there anyhow) Adrian "Luke Ma" <Luke_Ma@brown.edu> wrote in message news:H0rqG5.n1v@lugnet.com... (...) these (...) level. (...) would (...) this (...) Gravity (...) (...) (22 years ago, 13-Aug-02, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
| | | | | | |
