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

Making Gravity?

  1. May 5, 2008 #1
    I wanted to know if anything written in this pattent is supported by current theories in physics or experimental observations?

    US Patent # 3,626,605

    Method & Apparatus for Generating a Secondary Gravitational Force Field

    Henry W. Wallace

    this can be found in the link below

    http://www.rexresearch.com/wallace/wallace.htm" [Broken]

    Last edited by a moderator: May 3, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. May 5, 2008 #2
    The article itself should answer that question.
  4. May 5, 2008 #3


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I had to quit reading after a minute or so; it was making my head hurt. (Or maybe that was the vodka.) Either way, I couldn't get through it.
    If my understanding of the first couple of paragraphs is correct, then by this guy's reasoning a neutron star, composed of the densest material in existence spinning at incredible speeds, should be weightless. If he wants to try poking one with his finger to see if it moves, he's more than welcome to. I'll hang back and watch from a safe distance.
  5. May 5, 2008 #4


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Given the age and the fact that nothing has come of it, I think the answer should be obvious.
  6. May 7, 2008 #5
    I must admit that I read for just 2 minutes. But I also scrolled a little bit and found an even more interesting one: changing tha nuclear structure to alter heat transfer properties. The target invention was a head pump.

    No comments.
  7. May 10, 2008 #6
    Admirable is the "You can patent any old thing that comes into your head" norm. The chaps at the patent office are not supposed to police the worth of a patent, but the phrase "Patent Nonsense" does not arise from nowhere, and perhaps the patent office can refuse some patents on grounds of not making sense in the description. More controversial are the attempts to "own the future" by speculative semantics and predatory legal machinations.

    Getting back to artificial gravity - there is none, despite the patents! Just getting a concept for something so obviously a property of mass, yet also so obviously associated with accelerated motion and time, has made some of the best heads hurt for some centuries.

    Admittedly not actually "making" gravity, but instead contriving a structure that will continuously accelerate the folk inside toward an axis gives a situation for them indistinguishable from mass caused gravity . There was the movie fantasy space station from the opening scenes of "2001-A Space Oddesy". I was even more impressed by the slowly rotating gigantic ferris wheel feature of the craft from the movie "Mission to Mars" starring Gary Sinise, who must by now be one of the most physics-aware actors in Hollywood.

    The price for this type of "artificial" gravity is maybe that momentum transfer from foot-floor friction in moving about requires the wheel rotation occasionally be forcibly corrected. It took me right into my teens before I came to appreciate that I only "feel the force" when I am not doing the free fall. Once I have jumped, it switches off - until I have landed.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook