Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Acoustic Antigravity

45 comments:

Quantum_Flux said...

That doesn't necessarily count as antigravity, but it certainly is a neat lifting effect, simple to build with a few trips to Radioshack too and Ace Hardware.

OilIsMastery said...

What is levitation if not antigravity?

Quantum_Flux said...

Levitation is a lifting force that counters the force of gravitation. In general, a chair even fits that description too, it is the magnetic forces of the molecules that make up a chair that repell against the magnetic forces of the molecules of the person in contact with the chair by a force equivalent to the gravitational weight of the person sitting in it.

There is no known kind of antigravity, however hypothetically, an antigravity device would be composed of anti-mass, such that a gravitational field exherts the exact opposite direction of force than it does with regular mass. In such a system, like masses would attract each other and opposite masses would repell each other.

OilIsMastery said...

I see.

Since you define gravity as the opposite of electromagnetism of course you believe antigravity is impossible.

Since I define gravity as electromagnetic, any electromagnetic force that counteracts gravity should be called antigravity imo.

Quantum_Flux said...

Well, except that this is all done by acoustic air pressure.

Quantum_Flux said...

What exactly is the "opposite of electromagnetism"? I never recall defining gravitation as that. Gravitation is a force just like electromagnetism, and the strong and the weak nuclear forces are forces. Each force is distinctly unique, originating from different parts of matter.

OilIsMastery said...

What causes gravitational force?

Anaconda said...

Qunatum_Flux: "There is no known kind of antigravity, however hypothetically..."

Hmmm?

With the current mainstream assumptions of what constitutes gravity, you would need animass, but it seems quite possible the mainstream assumptions are wrong.

What the hell is going on in the video, then?

Here is an analogy: Sound acts like the electromagntic wave spectrum.

How so?

A high pitched sound (while dangerous to the ear if overloaded) can be easily stopped, it doesn't have penetration power (cheap ear muffs will cut out the dangerous high pitched sound, but not the lower, longer wave sounds that aren't as dangerous to the ear).

X-rays, a shorter electromagnetic wave, will be stopped by the atmosphere (that's why X-ray telescopes have to be launched into orbit like Chandra) and radio waves will penetrate to the Earth's surface.

But, Quantum_Flux, getting back to the video at hand, how do you explain it?

QF wrote: "but it certainly is a neat lifting effect..."

This sounds suspiciously like some scientist noting an anomally that falsifies some pet theory, and then quickly moves on...hoping to ignore the anomally -- and hoping everyobdy else does, too.

Or, the classic three steps of knowledge:

First, ignore it, then, second, ridicule it, third, state we knew it all the time.

Quantum_Flux, considering the, above, three steps of knowledge, you sound like step number three, but you haven't provided enough explanation to carry that kind of throw away line.

How does it work?

It doesn't look like you could just go to Radioshack and Ace hardware...

OilIsMastery said...

Acoustic = electromagnetic.

OilIsMastery said...

Anaconda,

"Or, the classic three steps of knowledge:

First, ignore it, then, second, ridicule it, third, state we knew it all the time."

I lol everytime I read that.

Anaconda said...

@ OilIsMastery:

"Acoustic = electromagnetic."

Yes.

So, studying acoustics could provide insight into electromagnetism.

It also suggests that electromagnetism is interwined with any vibrating system, even thermaldynamics.

Quantum_Flux said...

Haha, it's done by acoustical pressure (a mechanical phenomina, not an electrical one) and the speakers creating a standing sound wave (actually 3 different speakers in the XYZ directions in some more complicated versions of this).

Actually, by changing the phase of the standing soundwave in the various directions, the objects can be moved up-down, left-right, or front-back. Nothing mysterious about this, it isn't electromagnetic or antigravity, just acoustical/mechanical pressure wave.

Quantum_Flux said...

I find this interesting merely because I think I can probably build one.

OilIsMastery said...

QF,

Waves are electromagnetic.

Quantum_Flux said...

Some waves are electromagnetic, but not all waves are electromagnetic. Electromagnetic waves travel at the speed of light and constitute it's own medium of transmission (ergo, light can travel through a vacuum). Whereas sound requires a liquid, solid, or gas to traverse, but can't traverse through a vacuum though. Also, the speed of mechanical waves, i.e. sound, is much less than the speed of light.

OilIsMastery said...

QF,

"Some waves are electromagnetic, but not all waves are electromagnetic."

I disagree.

"Electromagnetic waves travel at the speed of light and constitute it's own medium of transmission (ergo, light can travel through a vacuum)."

Electromagnetic waves do not always travel at the speed of light. Light has been literally stopped dead in it's tracks in a frozen sodium ion chamber.

Light cannot travel through a vacuum because there is no such thing.

"Whereas sound requires a liquid, solid, or gas to traverse, but can't traverse through a vacuum though."

That's because vacuums do not exist. Sound seems to have no problem travelling in outer space though.

"Also, the speed of mechanical waves, i.e. sound, is much less than the speed of light."

Not when light is stopped in it's tracks.

Quantum_Flux said...

What is the speed of sound in a frozen sodium ion chamber?

KV said...

OIM,

Learn some "the" physics.

EM can attract or repel, gravity just attracts. Figure that in your thinking and eat fish. Invite Anaconda for fish fry.

KV said...

OIM,

If an electric charge is just sitting there, there is no magnetism. And, it does not even have EM waves! Yet, the charge repels the like kind of charge at a distance, and attracts the opposite charge, again at distance.

imode said...

Now that I have a name and bio behind OIM/BP the mystery and fun have dissipated. How convenient Google can be sometimes... Now that I know you majored in Philosophy it all makes sense now. You seem to view the world from metaphysics instead of physics.

I am intrigued how someone who is a chess fan and philosopher would have frequent lapses in logic. My only guess is that your beliefs are not what they appear and that you revel in confrontation.

This is not intended as an insult, just an observation.

KV said...

imode,

I am impressed you fished out OIM. For whatever it is worth, I had posted the following which OIM did not respond:

Man, you sicken me with your knowingly display of ignorance. You are not dumb, you just like to mess around with irrational logic (which is also a research area that affects mentally challenged, of which you show all the signs, and eating a ton of fish will help, before you decide to go on meds).

Anaconda said...

@ KV: "EM can attract or repel, gravity just attracts."

Yes, that is why electromagnetism is so much more dynamic than gravity.

"o" and "1" are what computers run on, so the difference is the difference between a functioning computer and one that doesn't work.

KV: "If an electric charge is just sitting there, there is no magnetism. And, it does not even have EM waves! Yet, the charge repels the like kind of charge at a distance, and attracts the opposite charge, again at distance."

All good, although, charged particles are, in many if not most instances, in motion, which, of course, do generate electromagnetic waves and magnetism.

But why the, "learn some 'the' physics" comment?

I don't see any reference to electrostatics in the post, which was simply reporting a scientific demonstration -- acoustics, which, of course, is the study of sound waves, you know, 'waves'...motion.

Apparently, you are reduced to chippy comments.

Too bad, but it does demonstrate the reaction of "modern" astronomers, or whatever you are, to ideas that run opposed to the "fraternity's" party-line.

You can do better than that...or can you?

Anaconda said...

KV wote: "Man, you sicken me with your knowingly display of ignorance. You are not dumb, you just like to mess around with irrational logic (which is also a research area that affects mentally challenged, of which you show all the signs, and eating a ton of fish will help, before you decide to go on meds)."

Of course, the, above, comment is intended simply to generate bias & prejudice against OilIsMastery.

It adds nothing to scientific discourse.

And what is the purpose of scientific discouse?

Well, let me suggest an answer:

"A science for humans is a science of questions, of learning, of possibilities and opportunities. Its aim is not to fold the unquestioned into the envelope of the given but to learn new words and to write new narratives."

Do I agree with every idea OilIsMastery posts?

No, of course not.

But Science is about considering the possibilities, granted some less likely than others, still if the conventional wisdom is never challenged, Man's understanding doesn't advance.

KV, your comment suggests a hostility to the basic business of Science: Asking questions.

Sadly, too many scientists seem more interested in defending the rote approved story line and attacking those that suggest alternative possibilites.

If you call yourself a scientist, then you should be ashamed of yourself.

Here is a good example of the rote response of "modern" astronomy in the face of unexpected observations:

A Lamentation for Arp 261, October 08, 2009 (TPOD)

The crisis in "modern" astronomy continues unabated.

KV, will you be part of the solution or part of the problem?

What is your commitment to understanding the physical reality of our world?

Or are you simply committed to protecting the status quo dogma?

KV said...

Anaconda,

You are back to your rant. so, rant.

More general concept for your brainwashed state: A charge not in motion can not generate magnetic field. So magnetism is an effect and motion of the charge is the cause, and motion requires basic understanding of "the" physics, that began with mechanics (as simple as lever) to quantum stuff, underwhich you are hiding by saying there is motion, however, imperceptible. Fish is a good dinner for body and brain.

By the way, why is it that Anaconda takes charge to comments specifically addressed to OIM? Is Anaconda is an avatar of OIM?

OilIsMastery said...

KV,

"EM can attract or repel, gravity just attracts."

Since the moon is being repelled from the Earth I guess it's pretty obvious which force is at work.

"If an electric charge is just sitting there, there is no magnetism."

Huh?

"And, it does not even have EM waves!"

Do you know what light is? Have you ever heard of a photon? They are electromagnetic radiation.

OilIsMastery said...

imode,

If you spent as much time studying electricity and magnetism as you do ad hominem fallacies and attacks you might learn something about the universe.

Thank God I'm a natural philosopher and not a physicist. Physicists only care about money and reputation. Philosophers not so much.

"It has been my sad observation that by mid-career there are very few professionals left truly working for the advancement of science, as opposed to the advancement of self. And given enough people with strong enough interests, professional peer pressure takes over from there. Peer pressure in science, as elsewhere in society, consists of alternately attacking and ignoring the people who advocate a contrary idea, and discrediting their motives and/or competence, in order to achieve conformity." -- Tom Van Flandern, astronomer, 1993

"You seem to view the world from metaphysics instead of physics."

Really? This in spite of the fact that I believe in observation and experiment and you don't?

"It is a singular and notable fact that, while most other branches of science have emancipated themselves from the trammels of metaphysical reasoning, the science of geology still remains imprisoned in 'a priori' theories." -- Sir Henry H. Howorth, geologist, 1895

"Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical research programme." -- Karl Popper, philosopher, 1976

"My only guess is that your beliefs are not what they appear and that you revel in confrontation."

"... please try to find a way to coexist with those of us who are not satisfied with the answers we now have, and want so much more." -- Tom Van Flandern, astronomer, 1993

"This is not intended as an insult, just an observation."

Care to reveal your identity and background or are you afraid of similar poor behavior redirected at you?

KV said...

OIM,

Do you know what is an electric charge, that is not in motion?

You wrote: Since the moon is being repelled from the Earth I guess it's pretty obvious which force is at work.

No it is not obvious! May be moon expands like you know, and gains mass like you know, and goes on moving away from the earth at 1.23 NANO meters per second (or 3.8 cm/yr).

Quantum_Flux said...

It is possible that the moon is losing mass via magnetic birkeland currents too.

Anaconda said...

@ KV:

Please, review your comments on this post.

Who is engaging in ad hominen attacks and carrying on about "fish".

It would seem if anybody's comments can be characterized as a rant, it would be yours.

KV: "So magnetism is an effect and motion of the charge is the cause..."

Agreed.

Too bad so many astronomers and astrophysicists seemingly maintain the exact opposite, like Dr. Leif Svalgaard.

And why do they maintain that?

Because without the fictions of so-called "magnetic reconnection" and "frozen in" magnetic field lines, they would have to acknowledge the ubiquitous presence of electric current, charged particles in motion, because magnetic fields are indisputably ubiquitous in the Universe.

KV, now see when you engage in reasonable scientific discourse, we make progress and the dialogue moves forward.

Thanks.

OilIsMastery said...

KV,

Electrons are always in motion.

Anaconda said...

To get back on topic, here is a passage I found interesting:

"A man who in more recent times claimed to know the secret of how the pyramids and other megalithic structures were built was Edward Leedskalnin.3 He lived in a place called Coral Castle, near Miami, Florida, which he built himself from giant blocks of coral weighing up to 30 tons. In 28 years, working alone, without the use of modern construction machinery, he quarried and erected a total of 1100 tons. He was very secretive and usually worked at night, and died in 1952 without divulging his construction techniques, despite visits from engineers and government officials. Some teenagers spying on him one evening claimed they saw him ‘float coral blocks through the air like hydrogen balloons’. It is widely thought that he had discovered some means of locally reversing the effects of gravity. From the remaining contents of Leedskalnin’s workshop and photographic evidence, engineer Chris Dunn suggests that he generated a radio signal that caused the coral to vibrate at its resonant frequency, and then used an electromagnetic field to flip the magnetic poles of the atoms so that they were repulsed by the earth’s magnetic field. "

Anaconda said...

oops, wrong post, my bad.

KV said...

OIM,

I did not ask about electron - the stuff physicists push. I asked about an electric charge.

If one can freeze a photon, so can we an electron (prefer an electric charge), stationary charge. But, philosophically, one can think about a charge without motion and its consequences. The first thing happens is the disappearance of magnetism.

Another philosophical question is about the axioms you begin with. Electrons or subtrons? Or something else? How do you define motion? Relative to what?

Finally, about fish. There are a good eating, and they do ton of goods to body and brain.

I hope, you are aware that a philosopher (schooled or self-taught) studies logic and logical systems. Simple "yes" or "no" systems are so rudimentary that it has no place in advanced topics we generally embark here. Yet, you and Anaconda resort to it. Finally, how many name calling to many posters you and/or Anaconda have done?

Quantum_Flux said...

Nothing ever stops moving, including the Universe.

OilIsMastery said...

KV,

Physicists do not push electrons. In fact, most physicists seem to have forgotten them entirely.
What physicists push are mythological gravitons and Dark Matter and other nonsense. There is a big difference. Electrons exist and have been observed; gravitons do not exist and have never been observed.

OilIsMastery said...

KV,

"How do you define motion? Relative to what?"

Motion is relational and is always relative to another defined object.

"Since we have already proved through geometrical considerations the equivalence of all hypotheses with respect to the motions of any bodies whatsoever, however numerous, moved only by the collision with other bodies, it follows that not even an angel could determine with mathematical rigor which of the many bodies of that sort is at rest, and which is the center of motion for the others." -- Gottfried W. Leibniz, polymath, 1689

"When formerly I regarded space as an immovable real place, possessing extension alone, I had been able to define absolute motion as change of this real space. But gradually I began to doubt whether there is in nature such an entity as is called space; whence it followed that a doubt might arise about absolute motion." -- Gottfried W. Leibniz, polymath, 1695

imode said...

Not at all Brian Pursley... I have an undergrad degree in Physics, a masters degree in applied Math and I work in finance as a quant developing HPC models for Monte Carlo simulation of VaR and N-factor pricing models.

I thought you might be a bright guy and you may have been at one time. But alas, something has changed in you. Your posts from 3-4 years ago were much more coherent and fun to read. All I read now is the rants of a paranoid, delusional mind. Sad really

OilIsMastery said...

imode,

If that's your real name,

"I have an undergrad degree in Physics"

Then you're aware of electromagnetism and plasma I take it?

Tell me, do you have some gravitons and Dark Matter I could borrow so that I might observe them and perform experiments on them as required by the scientific method?

"a masters degree in applied Math"

Really? So why don't you believe in Euclidean geometry?

"I work in finance as a quant developing HPC models for Monte Carlo simulation of VaR and N-factor pricing models."

Since your models are so good why do you have to work? Let me guess, your models predicted the recession all along and you're sitting in your hotel in the Maldives?

KV said...

OIM,

I had hoped a straightforward answer not what physicists think etc. If you use electron, you have to define it as most applied physicists do: a point-like particle with unit electric charge. See we still have not gotten to charge and how do we define a unit. In math and phil. it is easy - simply postulate and go on. What I was looking for is your postulation for electric charge.
Let us leave gravity and graviton etc. alone. One step at a time...

KV said...

QF,

We come to an end of life, a place of complete rest, no motion.

If OIM, Anaconda, and you are moving about randomly (in a non-inertial frame), all of you will have sense of motion of the one with respect to the other, and never yours. You may observe OIM and Anaconda either approaching each other or moving away from each other, etc. Relativity begins right here intrinsic in our thinking. (OIM, as philosopher, you can not reject the existence of relativity of observations of QF!)

Quantum_Flux said...

I'll tell you why that is absurd KV....mainly because we are made of molelules. Even after we're dead and decomposing, the electrons in our molecules are still going strong.

KV said...

QF,

But the state that you call QF here is gone to super freezer, and exists only in the artifacts you left (such as this writings) time stamped, dead, motionless (no revisions!).

It is so absurd to call molecules of "dead" bodies as you. I don't know how many dead cows, chicken, beans, fish, etc. am I talking to QF!

KV said...

OIM,

Your response to imode basically made his point.

Quantum_Flux said...

KV, you make no sense.

Fungus FitzJuggler III said...

http://www.physorg.com/news174308539.html

Some "new" research on plasma.

The mainstream are about to steal ideas from the plasma engineers!

Reinventing plasma the cosmological way!