Boeing and anti-gravity

It seems that Boing is more interested in the Gravity gun the Russians claim have developed that could knok sats out of orbit. That's the view of a British scientist.

Serving less alcohol in a plane you get your 2% gain, no antigravity needed!

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Ahh...you mean kind of like a graviton gun? Methinks if this proves to be valid research, ftl communication may well drop out as a bonus.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>Atko,
We have already discussed some Podkletnov's result in another thread started by you on this BB [url] metaresearch.org/msgboard/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=75 [/url]. My point was that we'd get quite a lot more out of those manipulations with gravity. I also reposted my comments on that report by Podkletnov&Modanese at another BB and I got some interesting comments from a seemingly knowledgeable person, try here [url] www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php...116&forum=1&start=54 [/url].

Thanks for the link Agorabasta (I do like the Bad Astronomy site) - I need to digest some of the stuff in that thread - most thought provoking. I was remembering the previous thread when I mentioned "our old friend" and meant to reference it, but couldn't find the URL - combination of the 30 day rule and fatigue after a good weekend, I think!

I read the badastronomy thread and wonder if Newton's first law covers inertia? Or is the second law also involved since elastic motions are said to be a part of inertia or something like this.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>I read the badastronomy thread and wonder if Newton's first law covers inertia? Or is the second law also involved since elastic motions are said to be a part of inertia or something like this.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>The First Law defines the inertial reference frame. The Second Law is the F=ma thing, which essentially defines the inertial mass. In that thread I proposed a phenomenological model of inertial mass and pointed at probable fundamental model for inertia (with extention towards gravity).

I don't understand a model of inertial mass. The law of inertia as stated in Newton's 1st seems to miss the field of gravity that is around or near the mass and when two units of mass are considered the tendency is altered. So then the 2nd law applies.