Project Greenglow: Is Anti-Gravity Possible?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ontophobe
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Anti-gravity Project
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the feasibility and scientific basis of Project Greenglow, specifically addressing the concept of anti-gravity and the relationship between gravitational mass and inertial mass. Participants explore theoretical implications and skepticism regarding the project.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested, Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether Project Greenglow aims to separate gravitational mass from inertial mass, suggesting a desire to achieve greater space-time curvature with less inertial mass.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about the project, labeling it as "crackpot" and commenting on the tendency for such ideas to receive funding despite lacking scientific rigor.
  • A third participant shares a similar initial reaction of skepticism but seeks confirmation of their feelings regarding the project.
  • A final post indicates that the discussion has been closed, citing forum rules.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express skepticism about the validity of Project Greenglow, with no consensus on its scientific merit or potential. The discussion remains unresolved due to the closure of the thread.

Contextual Notes

The discussion is limited by the lack of detailed scientific sources and the subjective nature of participants' reactions to the project. There are unresolved questions regarding the theoretical underpinnings of the concepts discussed.

Ontophobe
Messages
60
Reaction score
1
I can't find any good sources on the science behind Project Greenglow. All the articles I see are full of fluff. Are they trying to divorce gravitational mass from inertial mass? i.e., trying to get more gravitational mass out of less inertial mass, or I should say more space-time curvature from less inertial mass?

As far as I know, if you want to curve space-time as much as a star curves space-time, then you need the same mass/energy/density as a star. And we think rocket fuel is "heavy"...
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Crackpot, crackpot, crackpot, ... (sigh)

It never ceases to amaze me how much crackpot rubbish can get funding if it holds the promise of something highly desirable (such as an anti-grav drive).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
That was my gut reaction, too, but I wanted to be sure
 
There is nothing to discuss here, per PF rules.

Thread closed.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Reframing Light Bending Using Density Instead of Radius
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
1K
Undergrad How can the volume of a star be determined?
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
High School Is there a white hole inside every black hole?
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
Undergrad Source of Gravity of heavy mass as per GTR
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Undergrad Does Space Curvature Account for Gravity Between Individual Atoms?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Undergrad The Equivalence Principle as a Starting point of GR
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
6K
Undergrad Reconciling smooth spacetime with variable, rotating, earth gravity
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Undergrad Explanation for Galaxy Rotation Curves
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Undergrad Does Gravity Affect Mass Measurement in Flat Spacetime?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Undergrad Non-Inertial Relativistic Dynamics
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K