Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Lockeheed martin experiments with Anti-gravity

  1. Nov 12, 2009 #1

    interesting video. The more research I try to do behind this - the more confused I get. Apparently he uses some form of diamagnetic levitation which some say was faked for the documentary. I'm skeptical but I have to admit the video is damn interesting.
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 25, 2014
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 12, 2009 #2
    The fact that he uses that children's toy to promote his ideas indicates to me that he is shady.

    Man, I only wish that Lockheed had some sort of instrumentation that they could use to measure time of flight!
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 12, 2009
  4. Nov 12, 2009 #3
    Sometimes I think that if these people ACTUALLY figured out how to do these things then we would know about it.
    Other companies and countries would jump all over these ideas spending billions of dollars to develop it themselves... There are some scientific developments that aren't known to the public but these are solely military application. Something reducing the effects of gravity does not only have military applications...

    I guess what I'm saying is I don't buy it.
  5. Nov 12, 2009 #4


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    http://dilbert.com/dyn/str_strip/000000000/00000000/0000000/000000/30000/0000/500/30562/30562.strip.print.gif [Broken]
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  6. Nov 12, 2009 #5
    All I had time for was about half the interview but interesting! His drop test should be easy to replicate provided you have some expensive magnets.
  7. Nov 12, 2009 #6
    His experimental method is atrocious and indicative of a fraud.
  8. Nov 12, 2009 #7
    Maybe he is a fraud but what experimental method are you talking about? His dropping objects method?
  9. Nov 12, 2009 #8


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Wow... the celt is completely newtonian. He makes it seem all mysterious, but it's just a matter of the geometry of the celt. And he only states half of Newton's law. The other half is "until acted on by a force".

    Is this pissing Lockheed Martin off at all?
  10. Nov 12, 2009 #9
    Sure thing, I only watched about 5 minutes after that.

    He got 9 guys to sign a form or something regarding which hit the ground first? Did they do a pinky swear?

    Lockheed has got light gates all around the place, if he was interested in obtaining real data.
  11. Nov 12, 2009 #10


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    The old guy is one hell of a name-dropper, with all kinds of "deniability" to make it looks like he knows a lot that he can't disclose. The "friend of a friend" story about the pilot entering a UFO with transparent walls is a pretty good one, in particular. As someone who has spent thousands of hours looking at the night sky (though, admittedly, with a fairly narrow FOV when using telescopes), I can't say that I have ever seen anything that didn't have a rational plausible explanation. The most dramatic such sighting was a meteor that was so bright that it lit up the ground as I was setting up my scope, and left a trail of ionized gas that persisted for a long time, and slowly drifted off to the East, like the contrail from a jet would hang in the air.
  12. Nov 12, 2009 #11


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    This wiki article claims to explain what it calls his "parlor trick":

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boyd_Bushman [Broken]
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  13. Nov 12, 2009 #12


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Not as much as when they tested the first prototype outdoors ?
  14. Nov 13, 2009 #13
    well you wouldn't see it, with transparent walls and all :wink:
  15. Nov 13, 2009 #14

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    My word, what a bunch of doo doo.

    Right out the gate he mentions one of the biggest crackpots going - Hutchison.

    Next he mentions number two crackpot - Bob Lazar
    http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/sflazar.html [Broken]

    Both subjects are already banned from discussion.

    I don't know what the point was with the toy, which is known as a rattleback, but there is no mystery.

    As for the magnet in the copper tube and the coil above the aluminum plate, see Lenz's Law. We used to do this demo [essentially] using an aluminum plate and an MRI magnet. Just stand the plate up on edge in the center of the field. Ever so slowly it falls over as the energy of motion is lost to heat from induced currents. In the case of his demo with the plate, the changing magnetic field from the coil induces current in the plate, that in turn produces a magnetic field that opposes that of the coil, hence the coil levitates. When the magnet falls through the copper tube, we get the same effect. As the magnet falls, current is induced in the pipe that opposes the motion of the magnet. As soon as the motion of the falling magnet is halted, the opposiing field collapses and the magnet continues to fall.

    Finally, he ran some experiment with casual observers but he can't reproduce it for a paper? When he publishes in the journal Science and gets his Nobel Prize, we can talk about it. Five guys with no relevant education do not count as peer review.

    This is all complete hogwash.
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  16. Nov 13, 2009 #15


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    lol'd @17:52

    I hope we get to this new #5 force in my QFT class...
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Similar Discussions: Lockeheed martin experiments with Anti-gravity
  1. Anti-gravity (Replies: 46)

  2. Anti gravity is false (Replies: 1)