To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.spaceOpen lugnet.space in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Space / 16333
16332  |  16334
Subject: 
Re: Anti Grav (was Say it ain't so...)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.general, lugnet.space
Date: 
Sun, 11 Aug 2002 07:13:53 GMT
Viewed: 
38 times
  
In article <H0LKzn.HuB@lugnet.com>,
"Tom Sciortino" <tsciorti@band.calpoly.edu> wrote:

"Matt Hein" <Pyrokid17@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:H0LJrn.DHy@lugnet.com...
<snip>
Anti-gravity boosters? Well, I suppose that could be a reality too,
but depending on the atmosphere, It might need a different design if
it isn't to fly down like a rock. The Jedi Starship has a really odd
design, and I'm not sure how it could fly (unless it has a really *big*
anti-grav booster on the back)
<big snip>

I don't know how others figure it, but my creations have internal antigrav
generators.  It's a very small device that can fit just about anywhere on
the spacecraft (though preferable at its center of mass).  Problem with
antigrav is that it has to be near a massive (ie, gravity-generating) object
in order to have something to repell against.  Antigrav is good for take off
and landing, but not interstellar flight.  That's why I figure all ships
need antigrav _and_ thrusters.

My two cents and a small attempt to pull this back toward space...

            -- Tom

   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, "anti-gravity" should be called "gravity-repulsion", since
polar opposites of basic forces do not exist .
   Thirdly, since gravity is the weakest force, no one would build a
machine that would pit gravity against gravity. Any so-called
"anti-gravity" device would probably utilize electromagnetic propulsion.
Thus, the most accurate name for this type of technology would be
"electromagnetic-repulsion." However, this name is rather cumbersome,
and "anti-gravity" sounds cool. Also, it allows one to name a device
without having to explain its inner workings.

--
Serve the righteous might of the Empire, citizen!
http://www.geocities.com/stuttgartergunther/



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Anti Grav (was Say it ain't so...)
 
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)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Anti Grav (was Say it ain't so...)
 
"Matt Hein" <Pyrokid17@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:H0LJrn.DHy@lugnet.com... <snip> (...) <big snip> I don't know how others figure it, but my creations have internal antigrav generators. It's a very small device that can fit just about (...) (22 years ago, 9-Aug-02, to lugnet.general, lugnet.space)

97 Messages in This Thread:







































Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR