Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

ESA Announces Gravity-Modification Breakthrough

Expand Messages
  • Tim Ventura
    Story Link: http://www.americanantigravity.com/articles/498/1/ ESA Announces Gravity-Modification
    Message 1 of 1 , Mar 25, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Story Link: <http://www.americanantigravity.com/articles/498/1/>
      http://www.americanantigravity.com/articles/498/1/

      ESA Announces Gravity-Modification Breakthrough
      Gravitomagnetic London Effect Found in Rotating Superconductors

      This week the <http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/GSP/SEM0L6OVGJE_0.html> European
      Space Agency announced the results of an experimental test in which a
      superconductor rotating at 6,500 rpm is shown to gain weight as the result
      of what is believed to be a gravity-modification effect. As reported by the
      ESA, "The experiment demonstrated that a superconductive gyroscope is
      capable of generating a powerful gravitomagnetic field, and is therefore the
      gravitational counterpart of the magnetic coil. Although just 100 millionths
      of the acceleration due to the Earth’s gravitational field, the measured
      field is a surprising one hundred million trillion times larger than
      Einstein’s General Relativity predicts."

      The results were presented March 21st at the ESA's European Space and
      Technology Research Centre (ESTEC), in a paper entitled "
      <http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0603033> Experimental Detection of the
      Gravitomagnetic London Moment". The paper predicts the presence of a large
      gravitomagnetic field within a rotating superconductor, and describes the
      experimental detection of this phenomenon as an extra-gravitational
      acceleration on the superconductor on the order of 100 µg.

      The experiment was performed by Dr's <http://ilfb.tuwien.ac.at/~tajmar/>
      Martin Tajmar & Clovis De Matos at ARC Seibersdorf, Austria's largest
      independent research laboratory. Tajmar, the Head of Field Space Propulsion
      Business for ARC, was quoted as stating that these results, while
      preliminary, were nonetheless rigorously reviewed before publication, "We
      ran more than 250 experiments, improved the facility over 3 years and
      discussed the validity of the results for 8 months before making this
      announcement. Now we are confident about the measurement." Dr. Tajmar
      previously commented on this continuing research study during a
      <http://www.americanantigravity.com/articles/471/1/> video-interview with
      American Antigravity at STAIF 2006.

      While the announcement of these initial test-results is highly promising,
      Tajmar suggested that more experimentation is required before the results
      can be considered fully conclusive. In a statement Saturday, Tajmar
      remarked, "Of course, this effect needs further confirmation with other
      sensors, setups, etc. As an experimentalist, it is always very hard to
      release such data knowing that the claims are extraordinary, so I really
      want to be very cautious."

      Tajmar's experimental results follow in a long thread of anecdotal claims &
      theoretical predictions from scientists such as Dr's Ning Li, Evgeny
      Podkletnov, Douglas Torr, Robert Baker, Raymond Chiao, and David Maker.
      While Li & Podletnov have described seeing remarkable large-scale
      experimental results, other experiments have produced no results whatsoever,
      creating a general uncertainty in the scientific community as to whether
      gravitomagnetic effects do in fact exist in superconductors.

      Dr. Clive Woods of Iowa State University addressed the issue of
      gravitational-coupling in superconductors in a recent publication entitled "
      <http://www.americanantigravity.com/articles/407/1/> High-Frequency
      Gravitational Wave Optics". His research revisits earlier calculations by Li
      & Torr showing that gravitational waves inside a Type-II superconductor
      propogate with a phase-velocity 300 times slower than in free-space, and
      leading to the hypothesis that a superconductor may require focusing in
      order to correctly absorb & re-radiate gravitational waves. This notion may
      explain in part at least some of the difficulty found in obtaining
      consistent experimental results, as illustrated by the experimental failure
      of Dr. Raymond Chiao's "
      <http://www.tribuneindia.com/2002/20020502/science.htm#2> gravity-radio"
      experiment in 2003.

      While Woods’ publication certainly seems to provide new insight into
      manipulating gravitational force using superconductors, Tajmar believes that
      Woods’ research is not applicable to this latest experiment, "As you have
      probably seen in the experimental paper, we found the effect in Nb and Pb
      (Type-II and Type-I) - so it's not specifically related to Type-I or II
      superconductors. Moreover, Clive based his focusing requirements on the
      speed of gravity equation from an old Li & Torr paper - after calculating
      through her paper, I believe that this specific equation is not correct."

      Another startling aspect of Tajmar's reported experimental results is the
      scale, which demonstrates a coupling many orders of magnitude higher than
      both Relativity Theory and earlier research into High-Frequency
      Gravity-Waves (HFGW's) would predict. HFGW researcher & STAIF
      Session-Chairperson Gary Stephenson commented on this by noting that the
      difference in scale of the reported effects may be the result of Tajmar's
      experimental implimentation, which he described as a "DC static
      gravitomagnetic field, potentially bound by different coupling efficiencies
      than those predicted by the wavelike AC-nature of traditional High-Frequency
      Gravitational Waves."

      If the gravitomagnetic coupling coefficient is in fact higher for
      rotating-superconductors than for HFGW experiments, it could mean new life
      for the experimental research of
      <http://www.americanantigravity.com/articles/40/1/> Dr. Evgeny Podkletnov,
      best-known for a <http://www.wired.com/wired/6.03/antigravity.html>
      highly-publicized 1996 claim to have created a
      <http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/9701074> 2% decrease in the weight of a YBCO
      Type-II superconductor rotating at 5,000 rpm. Podkletnov has since then also
      described creating a powerful " <http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0108005>
      force-beam" apparatus by passing a high-energy electrical discharge from a
      Marx-Generator through a superconducting spark-gap during experimentation at
      the Moscow Chemical Research Institute in Russia.

      Gary Stephenson commented in the similarity between the 1996 experiments and
      Tajmar's results, stating, "Tajmar's experiment seems highly analogous to
      Podkletnov's experiment, but based on a firmer theoretical foundation. In
      essence, they are <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2157975.stm>
      spinning a superconductor, which is exactly what Podkletnov claimed produced
      an identical -- albeit larger-- result."

      STAIF Conference Section-F Chairman Paul Murad made a more direct
      comparison, stating, "Is this truly the first time that we've seen this
      effect, or has it perhaps already been documented under different
      manifestations? Is this the same as Podkletnov's gravity-shielding effect? I
      can't help but wonder if these results have been seen in the past in other
      experiments, and perhaps were either not reported or instead attributed to
      other causal factors..."

      With Tajmar's recent publication raising more questions than answers, there
      seems to be only one point of clear consensus -- the need for additional
      research. Paul Murad summarized the views of many with the statement, "For
      the moment, I'm taking a wait and see attitude to see how this research
      further develops. We also have to see the experimental setup, possible
      environmental & terrestrial sources of error, and a variety of successful
      experimental replications before making a determination. We need to see this
      reproduced by others before making a final decision."

      _____


      Links: <http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/GSP/SEM0L6OVGJE_0.html> ESA: Towards a
      New Test of General Relativity?, <http://ilfb.tuwien.ac.at/~tajmar/> Martin
      Tajmar Homepage, <http://www.wired.com/wired/6.03/antigravity.html> Wired:
      Breaking The Law of Gravity,
      <http://www.tribuneindia.com/2002/20020502/science.htm#2> Chiao's
      Gravity-Radio

      Interviews: <http://www.americanantigravity.com/articles/471/1/> Martin
      Tajmar Video Interview (STAIF 2006),
      <http://www.americanantigravity.com/articles/40/1/> Eugene Podkletnov Audio
      Interview #1, <http://www.americanantigravity.com/articles/41/1/> Eugene
      Podkletnov Audio Interview #2

      Publications: <http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0603033> Experimental Detection
      of the Gravitomagnetic London Moment, <http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0603032>
      Local Photon and Graviton Mass and its Consequences

      Related: <http://www.americanantigravity.com/articles/407/1/>
      High-Frequency Gravitational-Wave Optics,
      <http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/9701074> Weak gravitational shielding
      properties of superconductors, <http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0209051>
      Investigation of HV discharges through large ceramic superconducting
      electrodes, <http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0108005> Superconductor Impulse
      Gravity Generator
      <mailto:tventura6@...>


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.