Antigravity Research

The energy that vaporized Hiroshima was the equivalent of roughly one gram of mass. If your experiment is looking for the mass equivalent of compressing a spring, I don't believe there is a scale accurate enough to detect it.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Patrick</i>Why does it only take 9 pounds of plutonium to produce a 50 megaton explosion of ENERGY?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">You're attributing the yield of a hydrogen fusion bomb with the composition of an atomic fision bomb. And remember, the energy released by the Nagasaki bomb, rougly 10 kiloton, was not the whole mass of plutonium used, but the difference between that and the end products after fission.

Historical note: Little Boy, dropped on Hiroshima, used uranium; Fat Man, dropped on Nagasake, used Plutonium.

[Added moments after original post]Implosion doesn't significantly increase either the gravity or the mass of the Uranium or Plutonium. The more empty space there is around the fuel, the more chance that the neutrons will escape without striking another neucleus. Implosion merely increases the probability that a neutron from one decaying nucleus will strike another nucleus, resulting in a chain reaction. (Like Walt Disney's room-full of moustraps and ping pong balls.) Critical mass is achieved when that probability is slightly greater than 50%. With two neutrons released from each decaying neucleus, the rate of decays then increases exponentially.

The implosion must be done very quickly, so it is done by detonating a shell of high explosive around a hollow shell of neuclear fuel. Detonators, symetrically arranged around the explosive, start spherical shock waves expanding outward from the point of detonation; alluminum lenses then focus the shock waves so that they become inward-moving spheres surrounding the neuclear fuel. The hollow shell of fuel becomes a solid ball and the chain reaction goes exponential.

I agree with Mark that mass energy under normal conditions is conserved, unless under severe stress from outside impact which would either deform the structure and geometries of fields, or under severe impact then the sum total of all energies would be released; and, if the impact was great enough would include higher dimensional (FTL interactions) nuclear energies such as created by high energy impacts within collider experiments or nuclear explosions.

Patrick, there is mostly space within and between the atoms and charged accelerations. For instance here is a comparison of just how much space exists between the atoms, electron orbits and the nucleus: For example, to get a good understanding of just how huge the space is between the atoms picture an orange the size of the earth, and the atoms would be the size of cherries, and the nucleus inside the cherry would be the size of a grain of sand. Gravity fields include complex geometries of outward pressure radiations from objects creating a Magnus effect (that can maintain rotational forces indefinitely under orbital accelerations due to differential radiation impact on surface) and incoming graviton field nuclear interactions. The shuttle is not compressed in space but does have to protect itself from the vacuum (air pressure greater then vacuum) and has a natural electromagnetic field around it, and like you said objects would be drawn towards the center of mass and travel along with shuttle at least until a larger electric field and mass came along.

John

I don't think you guys are getting how insignificantly the mass of a spring can be increased by merely compressing it. For a really extreme example, consider C4 plastic explosive; now there's a really tightly wound up coil spring inside each molecule! The chemical energy released when you explode C4 is equivalent to about 10^-9 of its mass. I got that figure by dividing 9 km/sec (the explosive velocity of C4) by c and square the result. If your coil spring jumps up at 9 m/sec when you release it, its stored energy is 10^-15 of its mass. There aren't many scales around that can measure that small of a fraction of the applied weight.

Now, back to neuclear fission: When a U-235 neucleus splits, I don't recall the exact end products, but their combinded mass is about 1% less than the original mass. Compare that to C4's .0000001%. That's where the energy comes from; it was stored in the U-235 neucleus all along; it does not come from the implosion. The implosion merely brings the U-235 nucleii close enough to each other so their ejected neutrons don't fly off into space without hitting other U-235 neucleii and causing them to each split and release two more neutrons.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by PhilJ</i>

I don't believe it is known yet whether anti-matter possesses positive or negative gravity. If MM is right about the cause of gravity, it seems logical that anti-matter should have positive gravity; but I could be wrong about that.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I would say that both matter and antimatter have positive gravity relationships in that Mass becomes a gravity well for the centering of geometries of synchronizations of all combined forces that include greater dimensional forward and reverse time waves.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> A couple of years ago, I started a discussion about " repulsion of like charges ". To my knowlege, there is no satisfactory explanation of it in MM. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

The positive and negative attraction model is flawed. The problem is that two disks spinning in opposite directions even though they are attracted to each other will actually spread apart as the attraction creates greater accelerations (flux tensions creates electrostatic build up and repulsion). It is the acceleration of the fields that create either attraction or repulsion as flux fields tear off attempting to get to the opposite charge from both reverse spin disks. Plus, there is the greater cycling of energies that are dimensional feeding the dual reverse spin vortex. Also, there is sympathetic and non-sympathetic vibrational waveforms that can resonate instantaneously (FTL) between all like charged particles in a field (that spin in same direction and normally would be repulsed by each other). Do these sympathetic super-resonances now become an attracting force between the same charged particles? It has been shown that dissonance caused by two resonance fields that are not in synchronizations with the vibratory force will cause repulsion.

So, if all matter has a phase conjugation of reverse time waves interacting as a reverse spin element within the orbital dynamics of mass fluctuations of all particle waveforms, then it is possible that the greater flux field of the universal graviton resonances spin in opposite directions creating a negative and positive gravitational force field. The flux fields of greater universe then would be in synchronization with the forward time and reverse time both forming a vortical flow pattern as these waveforms cascade into and out of this dimensional spectrum of light energies called matter.

I was reading some of the stuck science arguments against TVF speed of gravity and electrostatic force being FTL, and I thought that if they read my posts they will most likely have a cow since I am literally proposing that TIME is the key here in understanding universal energetics. It will be interesting to see what the CERN scientists finally come up with regarding time dynamics and antimatter asymmetries in forward time.

So, my conclusions so far are that there are two types of gravitational forces that are created by matter and antimatter. Forward and reverse time repulse each other, so most likely antimatter because of the dimensional time wave recedes away from forward time objects.

John

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by PhilJ</i>
<br />I don't think you guys are getting how insignificantly the mass of a spring can be increased by merely compressing it. For a really extreme example, consider C4 plastic explosive; now there's a really tightly wound up coil spring inside each molecule! The chemical energy released when you explode C4 is equivalent to about 10^-9 of its mass. I got that figure by dividing 9 km/sec (the explosive velocity of C4) by c and square the result. If your coil spring jumps up at 9 m/sec when you release it, its stored energy is 10^-15 of its mass. There aren't many scales around that can measure that small of a fraction of the applied weight.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Yes PhilJ, I would tend to agree with you on this one. The amount of energy described is too minoot to measure however the concept is correct. What if we took a 5kg weight and attached it to a hollow metal sphere, took a weight measurement from 1 meter under water and then took another measurement at 100 meters. The predicted results are an INCREASE in weight. The reason is because the enourmous energy COMPRESSING the sphere converts to mass.

How do you like that one?[]

Patrick[]